Says the twister in chief.
Vaccine
- Thread starter Multi Sport
- Start date
Says the twister in chief.
Not insignificant.
You're trying to get to 90%, without infecting the immunocompromised.
If everyone under 16 is unvaccinated, then you top out near 80%, even if everyone over 16 gets the jab.
Assuming, of course, you are going to completely ignore the naturally immune.
Even then. If you have enough covid circulating to infect most 0-15 year olds, you also infect most immune compromised people.
Remember the goal was to get herd immunity without infecting the vulnerable.
Desert Hound
DA
Not for most people. Most people have very low risk profiles.
This is a disease that affects the old with health issues and others with severe health issues.
The typical person has very little risk. Go look at the CDC data and look at the IFR per age group. The info is there.
That isnt an argument not to get vaxxed. It is just pointing out the obvious that the vast vast majority of people are not at risk of this virus when they are unvaxxed or vaxxed.
And what would that matter if the Immune compromised/vulnerable have had the Vaccine?
what-happened
GOLD
Completely insignificant, especially from a disease treatment and management perspective.
From a medical standpoint, this is foolishness. The immunecompromised should already be vaccinated and are eligible for boosters. To vaccinate a low risk population to protect them is wastefull and some will claim unethical. We already know vaccinated people spread the disease and die from breakthrough infections. Maybe test and put a mask on little johnny/sally when they go visit their immune comprimised family member who's been super boosted. There are plenty of ways to ethically protect the immunecomprimised.
Makes zero sense. But don't worry, you'll get your wish soon enough. The doors will open and parents will rush their healthy kids to get vaccinated in time for Christmas.
EvilGoalie 21
GOLD
Funny how this works.
The natural immune protection that develops after a SARS-CoV-2 infection offers considerably more of a shield against the Delta variant of the pandemic coronavirus than two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, according to a large Israeli study that some scientists wish came with a “Don’t try this at home” label. The newly released data show people who once had a SARS-CoV-2 infection were much less likely than never-infected, vaccinated people to get Delta, develop symptoms from it, or become hospitalized with serious COVID-19.
Science | AAAS
www.science.org
This is the same study that has been posted here repeatedly, probably without people realizing it is the same one. Again, the entire conclusion rests on how ~260 cases bin between cohorts that number ~65000 each. In both cohorts, doubled vaxxed and previously infected, the central observation is that second infections are rare. Given that the events of interest (ie secondary infection) are very small, there are statistical issues and cohort matching issues associated with the study. These problems are touched upon at some length by various people posting within the comments section of the preprint server on which the study is posted. As of last week, the paper still remains under review. Given the length of time that has passed, it is possible that that the authors have been asked to provide extensive additional documentation, or to demonstrate that their findings actually have predictive value in a larger, random sampling.
That Science chose to highlight this study-as a preprint-is I think unfortunate, and an example of how the scientific community and journal editors need to adopt more rigorous best practices to ensure studies like this are not misappropriated. The immunologist quoted in the Science highlight (the one who says "don't try this home") is a leading figure in the field and, at the time this preprint was posted, was about to have a big paper coming out showing how the the clean up on aisle 5 that results from the massive cell lysis associated with viral infection stimulates formation of cellular structures that can then become super-primed by subsequent vaccination. So they were sort of interested in this type of synergy between infection and vaccination and I think that is why Science decided to highlight it. I was bothered by the cavalier attitude at Science and wrote the editor with like "do you realize what you are messing with". The response was largely, well, if the numbers don't hold up then it doesn't matter. But that's wrong. For this study it is now too late for whether the numbers are right.
My position is, and always has been, that my politics would have been considered to be conservative before that term was stolen by politicians as cover for hate, fear, and greed.
what-happened
GOLD
Vaccination ---immune comprimsed....Boosters ---- immune comprised.
0-12, low risk, why vaccinate? Herd immunity went buh bye with Delta. It's like starting all over again. Amazing what a novel virus is capable of.
GoldenGate
GOLD
Meanwhile, courtesy of worldometers -dot- info, let's check back in with Florida. The drop in COVID deaths there has been extremely sudden and sharp, even though the general public has not modified its behavior at all. (I live here, so I know.)
The chart says it all:
As a friend of mine puts it, thank goodness we can be sure the media will get right to the bottom of this!
Hey dumbshit, I checked back in at worldometers like you recommended. The 7-day moving average for Oct 2 has already doubled in a single day. It turns out there has been no sudden decrease in FL Covid deaths. The only reason it was at 17 yesterday and not 34 as it is today (and will probably be 200+ in a week) is because FL holds back the info for weeks. It will be fascinating to shove this up your ass every day as the 7-day moving average for Oct 2 steadily increases "retroactively" as FL eventually reports all the actual deaths that it now reports "retroactively". You are exactly why FL changed how it reports Covid deaths, which is to dupe dumbfucks like yourself. They know you are easily misled by the daily reporting and are too stupid to understand what they are doing or go back later and look at the actual numbers after they've stopped withholding that information.
GoldenGate
GOLD
Let's check out how great FL is doing anecdotally...
French study on the impact of masks on the very young....
lesprosdelapetiteenfance.fr
Les effets du port du masque sur les jeunes enfants en lieux d’accueil collectif
Au mois de décembre, nous avions diffusé un questionnaire sur l’impact du masque sur les jeunes enfants. Destiné à tous les professionnels de la petite enfance, il a été conçu par Anna Tcherkassof, chercheure en psychologie sociale sur la communication émotionnelle non verbale, au laboratoire...
More and more people are living alone and not in families.....
That, in conjunction with who has political power, is an explanation for why we were so willing to throw children under the bus during the pandemic....
www.washingtonexaminer.com
That, in conjunction with who has political power, is an explanation for why we were so willing to throw children under the bus during the pandemic....
Living alone and falling behind - Washington Examiner
As the family continues to fall apart, a growing segment of the population is poorer and lonelier than they were 30 years ago, according to a new paper published by the Pew Research Center on Tuesday. Almost 40% of adults age 25 to 54 lived alone in 2019, according to Pew, compared to just 29%
www.washingtonexaminer.com
met61
GOLD
Are you counting the under 16 who've contracted Covid and have natural immunity as unvaccinated?
met61
GOLD
...so you willingly usher in a guy who clearly has dementia... that's a hell of a high road.
GoldenGate
GOLD
100% of those who do not die from Covid-19 do not die from Covid-19.
Over 98% of people who contract Covid, survive Covid (that number is significantly higher if you are under 65 and/or if you are NOT Clinically obese).
Didn't want to go that far into the weeds on the post.
Add in past infections, then subtract out any transmission from breakthrough infections.
It's really hard to reach herd immunity for Delta without vaccinating 5-11 year olds.
Isn't that really though the key number? If the handful of studies touching upon the issue are right and immunity breaks through more readily with time, and since we are not mandating the boosters (and if we did we don't yet know if it confers longer last immunity), isn't that the key question? If it drops say to 40% (and anecdotally we are hearing about a lot of breakthroughs in the news....much more so than if the 10%-20% the pharma companies are saying would support), isn't herd immunity pretty much very hard to get to without everyone getting potentially longer lasting natural immunity?
And if natural immunity doesn't last, isn't the herd immunity number just pretty much impossible to reach?
Aren't those the $1,000,000 questions for how this ends?