Vaccine

What are the odds that they kill their 45-50 year old parents?
Something far less than .0351%.
.0351% is for 40-49 so lets assume conservatively that 45-50 would make up 3/4 of that number, so you reduce it to .0263%. One study says that adults are 2x as likely to spread Covid as children. If you believe that then you would reduce that percentage to a third, which gives you .0088% chance of a child spreading it to and killing an adult, or 99.9912% chance of a child not killing an adult. Rough math but you get the picture.
 
So...long term affects still not known.

We are starting to see some stuff that isn't good.

Remember in this age group, there really isn't any risk. And yet our gov wants to MANDATE the vaxx.

It is irresponsible.


“For patients in Israel’s largest healthcare system, Clalit Health Services, the estimate of myocarditis was 2.13 cases per 100,000 vaccinated persons, reaching as high as 10.69 cases per 100,000 in men and boys ages 16 to 29. A separate study using Israel’s government database, capturing active and passive periods of surveillance for myocarditis, supported the higher risk in young men. In this report, males of all ages had myocarditis occur at 0.64 cases per 100,000 persons after the first dose and 3.83 cases per 100,000 after the second dose — with the incidence increasing to 1.34 and 15.07 per 100,000 after the first and second doses, respectively, for teenage boys ages 16 to 19. Both papers were published online in the New England Journal of Medicine.”

Plus: “Compared with historical data from 2017 to 2019, myocarditis was more than five times as likely after mRNA vaccination in the overall population. Compared with people who remained unvaccinated during the study period (from Dec. 20, 2020, to May 31, 2021), fully vaccinated individuals had about double the risk at 30 days after the second dose.”

 
Need to study long term affects before we mandate people get a vaccine.

Most people have little to no risks. To mandate them to take a vaxx that has not had long terms studies is poor policy.

“Chief Epidemiologist Þórólfur Guðnason has decided that Iceland will halt the use of the Moderna vaccine in Iceland. RÚV reports that the decision was made after reviewing new data from the Nordic countries, which shows an increased incidence of myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle (or myocaridum), as well as pericarditis, an inflammation in the membrane surrounding the heart (or pericardium), among people vaccinated with Moderna. . . . Sweden currently restricts the use of Moderna to individuals who were born after 1991. Norway and Denmark recommend that Pfizer be used in lieu of Moderna for children aged 12 – 17.”

 
I am not predicting a death rate, I am just showing you the actual graphs from the same website that Bruddah claims show that FL's death rate declined to 17 a day effective Oct. 2nd.

I have questions for you. Do you believe that the graph that Bruddah provided which he claimed showed an average death rate of 17 per day as of 10/2 in FL is accurate? If so, how do you explain that that the same graph is now at 75 a day as of 10/2? Why are you criticizing me for discussing this and not Bruddah since he is the one who brought it up AND provided intentionally false information? Are you a right wing nut job also? Or do you just think that right wing nut jobs should be able to say whatever dumbfuck things they want, no matter how false, without pushback? Do you even understand the difference between facts and opinion? Why is it exactly that you think that right wing nut jobs are the only ones who should be allowed to say what they want?
Hopefully few people are coming to youth soccer forums to enrich their knowledge on everything/anything covid. But feel free to lead the charge on exposing misinformation/disinformation, it's not a bad thing.. Your tactic of twisting views and words is a bit tiresome. The criticism directed at you isn't centered around the information you provide, but rather your engagement method - which likely amuses those that counter your opinion and do it on purpose to see you go off the rail. You are an easy target.
 
So...long term affects still not known.

We are starting to see some stuff that isn't good.

Remember in this age group, there really isn't any risk. And yet our gov wants to MANDATE the vaxx.

It is irresponsible.


“For patients in Israel’s largest healthcare system, Clalit Health Services, the estimate of myocarditis was 2.13 cases per 100,000 vaccinated persons, reaching as high as 10.69 cases per 100,000 in men and boys ages 16 to 29. A separate study using Israel’s government database, capturing active and passive periods of surveillance for myocarditis, supported the higher risk in young men. In this report, males of all ages had myocarditis occur at 0.64 cases per 100,000 persons after the first dose and 3.83 cases per 100,000 after the second dose — with the incidence increasing to 1.34 and 15.07 per 100,000 after the first and second doses, respectively, for teenage boys ages 16 to 19. Both papers were published online in the New England Journal of Medicine.”

Plus: “Compared with historical data from 2017 to 2019, myocarditis was more than five times as likely after mRNA vaccination in the overall population. Compared with people who remained unvaccinated during the study period (from Dec. 20, 2020, to May 31, 2021), fully vaccinated individuals had about double the risk at 30 days after the second dose.”

The funny or sad thing about this is both here and other places we are being told they have studied the vaxxes and they are safe.

That is untrue as it relates to studies on possible long term affects.

We still dont know.

But the above example shows that they are finding out certain vaxxes and certain age groups do not go well together.

What else might we find?

The fact that we don't know if/to what extent there are long terms issues with certain age groups, demographics, etc. all makes the rather strong case that we should not be mandating people to get a vaxx.
 
So I checked back in with FL as you asked. That 7 day moving average of 17 deaths per day that you thought was so great is now at 75 - because FL holds back deaths for the express purpose of duping dumbfucks like you. It turns out that the decrease is neither sudden nor sharp. Too bad your dumbfuck friend is as easily duped as you. The media has already gotten to the bottom of this, which is that FL changed the way it reports Covid deaths so that recent deaths are not reported for weeks, giving the false impression that it's doing well.
7 day average deaths FL .......wait for it......4.
Screenshot 2021-10-12 Florida deaths.png
 
I checked with dad as to the reason why the number was so low.

Turns out everyone went to the bars around the state, and now there are only 100 or so people left in the entire state. Therefore that 4 number is still actually very high and concerning.
Turns out that a bunch of the elderly in FL are being blamed for aging. Apparently mask can stop Corona but not aging.
 
What are the odds that they kill their 45-50 year old parents?

1. One size fits none: Don't frame risk in terms of a generic person.

Specific demographic factors such as race and ethnicity, obesity, diabetes, and other comorbidities make an enormous difference in determining risk of a bad COVID-19 outcome. But the single most important risk factor, age, is often relegated to a few short lines in too much news coverage. Downplaying the huge decreased risk of mortality in children compared with mortality risk in the elderly is simply not factual reporting.

It can be tempting to frame risk using a generic person who is ageless and has no particular health status—but this makes accurate discussion of risk impossible. As The New York Times reported, in response to the question, “What are the chances somebody with COVID-19 must be hospitalized?” 41% of Democrats and 28% of Republicans surveyed answered that the risk was “over 50%.” Not only did answers differ widely by political affiliation, but a large swath of respondents was not even close to a correct answer.

Part of the misunderstanding on display here is that none of us identify as a generic “somebody.” The correct answer to this question depends greatly on age, and other risk factors, of the individual. The actual risk of COVID-19 hospitalization for a child under 18 who has COVID-19 is less than 0.2% per infection, or less than 1% per diagnosed case by current estimates; but it is 23% for an adult 65 or older, and even higher for those over 65 with comorbidities. Respondents to The New York Times poll entirely missed this distinction.
 
Completely unscientific of course...but if true the death rate is no higher than the rest of the community that's a real indictment on NPIs. Should be studied.

For the record, everyone drinking from the same wine and coming down with coronavirus the same week is a bridge too far for me.

 
Completely unscientific of course...but if true the death rate is no higher than the rest of the community that's a real indictment on NPIs. Should be studied.

For the record, everyone drinking from the same wine and coming down with coronavirus the same week is a bridge too far for me.

Yep a bridge too far for me as well.

That said the rest is interesting. As they just went along with normal life and didn't experience anything like was predicted.
 
Back
Top