I agree, both sides have valid points, the regurgitation of said points is getting old.Winterborn wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 11:47 amI think everybody has made a decision already. Now they are just trying to convert the other side to their particular brand of beliefs.
It is reminding me more and more of when the Jehovah Witnesses come around. Except in their case, they leave once they have heard that I am not interested.
In all transparency, I think both sides have valid points.
Coronavirus COVID-19
- Gil Dobie
- Supporter
- Posts: 30944
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:45 pm
- I am a fan of: Norse Dakota State
- Location: Historic Leduc Estate
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
-
- Supporter
- Posts: 26827
- Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:22 pm
- I am a fan of: Salisbury University
- Location: Republic of Western Sussex
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Especially on here.Gil Dobie wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 12:31 pmI agree, both sides have valid points, the regurgitation of said points is getting old.Winterborn wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 11:47 am
I think everybody has made a decision already. Now they are just trying to convert the other side to their particular brand of beliefs.
It is reminding me more and more of when the Jehovah Witnesses come around. Except in their case, they leave once they have heard that I am not interested.
In all transparency, I think both sides have valid points.
“I’m tired and done.” — 89Hen 3/27/22.
- SeattleGriz
- Supporter
- Posts: 16557
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
- I am a fan of: Montana
- A.K.A.: PhxGriz
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
That's because we solved it weeks ago, just like all our discussions. Now if the rest of the world would just listen to us.
On a separate note, I have made up my mind, but my company is telling me and 125k employees they better have chosen right.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
- Winterborn
- Supporter
- Posts: 8812
- Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:33 pm
- I am a fan of: Beer and Diesel Pickups
- Location: Wherever I hang my hat
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Was reading several articles today that the Chicago police union is pushing against Mayor Lightfoot's requirement to report their vaccination status and weekly testing (deadline is this Friday).SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 1:56 pm
That's because we solved it weeks ago, just like all our discussions. Now if the rest of the world would just listen to us.
On a separate note, I have made up my mind, but my company is telling me and 125k employees they better have chosen right.
Curious on:
A) Who blinks first: the Union or Lightfoot?
B) If neither gives in and Lighfoot puts 50%+ of Chicago PD on unpaid leave, what happens to Chicago crime rate? (629 homicides so far this year compared to 402 of the same time frame in 2019)
“The best of all things is to learn. Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.” – Louis L’Amour
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf
"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” - G. Michael Hopf
"I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious.” – Albert Einstein
-
- Supporter
- Posts: 26827
- Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:22 pm
- I am a fan of: Salisbury University
- Location: Republic of Western Sussex
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
As to B, it will probably look like the street riot scene from Police Academy x6.93.Winterborn wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 2:37 pmWas reading several articles today that the Chicago police union is pushing against Mayor Lightfoot's requirement to report their vaccination status and weekly testing (deadline is this Friday).SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 1:56 pm
That's because we solved it weeks ago, just like all our discussions. Now if the rest of the world would just listen to us.
On a separate note, I have made up my mind, but my company is telling me and 125k employees they better have chosen right.
Curious on:
A) Who blinks first: the Union or Lightfoot?
B) If neither gives in and Lighfoot puts 50%+ of Chicago PD on unpaid leave, what happens to Chicago crime rate? (629 homicides so far this year compared to 402 of the same time frame in 2019)
“I’m tired and done.” — 89Hen 3/27/22.
- SeattleGriz
- Supporter
- Posts: 16557
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
- I am a fan of: Montana
- A.K.A.: PhxGriz
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
I've got until Nov 24th to decide if I want the J&J vaccine. We'll see what the two unions in our company have to say, although I'm not in either.Winterborn wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 2:37 pmWas reading several articles today that the Chicago police union is pushing against Mayor Lightfoot's requirement to report their vaccination status and weekly testing (deadline is this Friday).SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 1:56 pm
That's because we solved it weeks ago, just like all our discussions. Now if the rest of the world would just listen to us.
On a separate note, I have made up my mind, but my company is telling me and 125k employees they better have chosen right.
Curious on:
A) Who blinks first: the Union or Lightfoot?
B) If neither gives in and Lighfoot puts 50%+ of Chicago PD on unpaid leave, what happens to Chicago crime rate? (629 homicides so far this year compared to 402 of the same time frame in 2019)
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
- JohnStOnge
- Egalitarian
- Posts: 20314
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
- I am a fan of: McNeese State
- A.K.A.: JohnStOnge
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
If you are talking about the vaccine thing both sides do not have valid points. We have one side that is putting out a bunch of misinformation and the other side trying to tell people the truth.Gil Dobie wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 12:31 pmI agree, both sides have valid points, the regurgitation of said points is getting old.Winterborn wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 11:47 am
I think everybody has made a decision already. Now they are just trying to convert the other side to their particular brand of beliefs.
It is reminding me more and more of when the Jehovah Witnesses come around. Except in their case, they leave once they have heard that I am not interested.
In all transparency, I think both sides have valid points.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?
Deep Purple: No One Came
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?
Deep Purple: No One Came
- Gil Dobie
- Supporter
- Posts: 30944
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:45 pm
- I am a fan of: Norse Dakota State
- Location: Historic Leduc Estate
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Actually both sides are putting out false information. The vaccine won't stop Covid, as the lefties are saying, but it makes things better. The lefties are not trying to tell people the truth, they are trying to force shit up people's Ass, and the other side is trying to force their shit up people's asses too.JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 4:12 pmIf you are talking about the vaccine thing both sides do not have valid points. We have one side that is putting out a bunch of misinformation and the other side trying to tell people the truth.
- JohnStOnge
- Egalitarian
- Posts: 20314
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
- I am a fan of: McNeese State
- A.K.A.: JohnStOnge
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
I don't think that's the correct way to do it. The risk among vaccinated was 0.000422878. The risk among those unvaccinated was 0.008840382. How much is risk reduced if it goes from 0.008840382 to 0.000422878? The answer is that it was reduced by (0.008840382 - 0.000422878)/0.008840382. That's the risk without vaccination minus the risk vaccinated divided by the risk without vaccination. That's 0.008417504/0.008840382 = 0.952165225 or about 95.2 percent. That's the extent to which the risk was apparently reduced in percentage terms.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Wed Oct 13, 2021 5:46 pm Some maths for you guys.
According to the Pfizer study:
8 out of 18,198 vaxxed caught COVID = .044%
162 out of 18,325 Unvaxxed caught COVID = .88%
The relative risk reduction is therefore .044%/.88%, which equals 5%. Take that from 100 and that is how you get a 95% relative risk reduction (efficacy).
Now let's calculate absolute risk reduction. Take .88% - .04% and you get .84%
Meaning that those who were vaxxed had a 0.84% reduction in catching COVID versus the unvaccinated.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?
Deep Purple: No One Came
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?
Deep Purple: No One Came
- SeattleGriz
- Supporter
- Posts: 16557
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
- I am a fan of: Montana
- A.K.A.: PhxGriz
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Doh. Looks as if MY maths was off. I was doing it laying in bed with my youngest! Thx for the assist.JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 4:25 pmI don't think that's the correct way to do it. The risk among vaccinated was 0.000422878. The risk among those unvaccinated was 0.008840382. How much is risk reduced if it goes from 0.008840382 to 0.000422878? The answer is that it was reduced by (0.008840382 - 0.000422878)/0.008840382. That's the risk without vaccination minus the risk vaccinated divided by the risk without vaccination. That's 0.008417504/0.008840382 = 0.952165225 or about 95.2 percent. That's the extent to which the risk was apparently reduced in percentage terms.SeattleGriz wrote: ↑Wed Oct 13, 2021 5:46 pm Some maths for you guys.
According to the Pfizer study:
8 out of 18,198 vaxxed caught COVID = .044%
162 out of 18,325 Unvaxxed caught COVID = .88%
The relative risk reduction is therefore .044%/.88%, which equals 5%. Take that from 100 and that is how you get a 95% relative risk reduction (efficacy).
Now let's calculate absolute risk reduction. Take .88% - .04% and you get .84%
Meaning that those who were vaxxed had a 0.84% reduction in catching COVID versus the unvaccinated.
The point was more about how people say Absolute Risk Reduction is a better indicator. Like Winterborn said, marketing.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
- SDHornet
- Supporter
- Posts: 19443
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
- I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
What have I been wrong about? And come with quotes or don't come at all.kalm wrote: ↑Wed Oct 13, 2021 3:26 pmQuestion for you both. After almost 2 years of being consistently wrong about all of this do you at some point turn on the politicians, grifters, and companies like Fox News who fed you the BS while getting vaxxed and/or requiring their employees to be vaxxed and socially distance?
Or do you just take your ball and go home?
- SDHornet
- Supporter
- Posts: 19443
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
- I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Spot on.Winterborn wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 11:47 amI think everybody has made a decision already. Now they are just trying to convert the other side to their particular brand of beliefs.
It is reminding me more and more of when the Jehovah Witnesses come around. Except in their case, they leave once they have heard that I am not interested.
In all transparency, I think both sides have valid points.
- SDHornet
- Supporter
- Posts: 19443
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
- I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Hey gil, speaking of CNN, here is their doctor getting shit on by a comedian/MMA announcer.
- 89Hen
- Supporter
- Posts: 39224
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 1:13 pm
- I am a fan of: High Horses
- A.K.A.: The Almighty Arbiter
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Had just seen that clip. Gupta had no answer other to say he agreed.
- JohnStOnge
- Egalitarian
- Posts: 20314
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
- I am a fan of: McNeese State
- A.K.A.: JohnStOnge
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
I think you are incorrect. The vaccines reduce the risk of infection and transmission. Yes. In spite of people continuing to say they don't, they do. There is plenty of basis for thinking that we could indeed stop COVID-19 as a significant factor in our lives if we could achieve a high enough vaccination rate.Gil Dobie wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 4:25 pmActually both sides are putting out false information. The vaccine won't stop Covid, as the lefties are saying, but it makes things better. The lefties are not trying to tell people the truth, they are trying to force shit up people's Ass, and the other side is trying to force their shit up people's asses too.JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 4:12 pm
If you are talking about the vaccine thing both sides do not have valid points. We have one side that is putting out a bunch of misinformation and the other side trying to tell people the truth.
Now, we will get to a point where we will have had so many infections that the situation will wane. But we will have had a lot more suffering than we would have had if we hadn't had this vaccine misinformation nonsense.
No vaccine has ever completely eliminated risk of infection and transmission. The idea is to reduce it to an extent sufficient to impede circulation of the virus and end the epidemic. The COVID-19 vaccines appear to be effective enough to accomplish that. But we have a critical mass of people in this country who are believing misinformation so we can't achieve the necessary vaccination rate.
Bottom line: The people who were saying 6 months ago and are continuing to say that we would be a lot better off as a population if we could get everybody vaccinated were and are telling the truth. The people who are saying otherwise are either lying or they are misinformed. It is not a "both are wrong" situation.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?
Deep Purple: No One Came
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?
Deep Purple: No One Came
- JohnStOnge
- Egalitarian
- Posts: 20314
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
- I am a fan of: McNeese State
- A.K.A.: JohnStOnge
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
It is a de-wormer. And it is used as a horse de-wormer. If the point is that Rogan is an idiot for using Ivermectin to treat COVID-19, the point is accurate. If a MD issued a prescription to Rogan to treat COVID-19 with Ivermectin, that MD should have his or her license revoked. It's malpractice.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?
Deep Purple: No One Came
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?
Deep Purple: No One Came
- JohnStOnge
- Egalitarian
- Posts: 20314
- Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
- I am a fan of: McNeese State
- A.K.A.: JohnStOnge
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Here is an article prepared by MMAWeekly.com Staff on the Rogan thing:
https://www.yahoo.com/now/joe-rogan-con ... MTksOcoh94
https://www.yahoo.com/now/joe-rogan-con ... MTksOcoh94
Joe Rogan appears to have fully recovered from his recent bout with COVID-19 and is clearly upset with how the media reported his use of the controversial drug, Ivermectin. Just last week Rogan announced he had tested positive for COVID-19 and taken Ivermectin, a drug routinely used to deworm horses. It’s also frowned upon for human use according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Ivermectin IS a horse de-wormer. And it does not work against COVID-19. The bottom line is that Rogan is a dumbass who is upset because someone correctly called him a dumbass.In a statement by Merck, the manufacturer of Ivermectin, the company states, "No scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19 from pre-clinical studies; No meaningful evidence for clinical activity or clinical efficacy in patients with COVID-19 disease, and; A concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies."
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?
Deep Purple: No One Came
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?
Deep Purple: No One Came
- SDHornet
- Supporter
- Posts: 19443
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
- I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
CNN framed Rogan taking Ivermectin as taking the horse dewormer and not a prescribed medication from human consumption (you know the thing that won a Nobel Prize in 2015)...which is what Rogan had before taking it. Only a disingenuous person or complete retard is ok with and buys the way CNN spun the "Rogan taking Ivermectin" narrative after he caught the China Virus. Not surprised you fall into the "complete retard" category.JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Fri Oct 15, 2021 4:38 pmIt is a de-wormer. And it is used as a horse de-wormer. If the point is that Rogan is an idiot for using Ivermectin to treat COVID-19, the point is accurate. If a MD issued a prescription to Rogan to treat COVID-19 with Ivermectin, that MD should have his or her license revoked. It's malpractice.
- SDHornet
- Supporter
- Posts: 19443
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
- I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Shit gonna get a lot more interesting in the coming weeks.
- SeattleGriz
- Supporter
- Posts: 16557
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
- I am a fan of: Montana
- A.K.A.: PhxGriz
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Years ago when I was working in the clinical lab industry, we had a phlebotomist at one of our draw stations ask a patient who was on Coumadin, if he knew what else it was used for? Rat poison. Needless to say, it freaked the old guy out and the phlebotomist got a talking to.SDHornet wrote: ↑Fri Oct 15, 2021 6:46 pmCNN framed Rogan taking Ivermectin as taking the horse dewormer and not a prescribed medication from human consumption (you know the thing that won a Nobel Prize in 2015)...which is what Rogan had before taking it. Only a disingenuous person or complete retard is ok with and buys the way CNN spun the "Rogan taking Ivermectin" narrative after he caught the China Virus. Not surprised you fall into the "complete retard" category.JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Fri Oct 15, 2021 4:38 pm
It is a de-wormer. And it is used as a horse de-wormer. If the point is that Rogan is an idiot for using Ivermectin to treat COVID-19, the point is accurate. If a MD issued a prescription to Rogan to treat COVID-19 with Ivermectin, that MD should have his or her license revoked. It's malpractice.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
- Gil Dobie
- Supporter
- Posts: 30944
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 7:45 pm
- I am a fan of: Norse Dakota State
- Location: Historic Leduc Estate
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
First you tell me I'm wrong, next you tell me I'm right that no vaccine has ever completely eliminated risk of infection and transmission. The left is saying or was saying it did.JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Fri Oct 15, 2021 4:26 pmI think you are incorrect. The vaccines reduce the risk of infection and transmission. Yes. In spite of people continuing to say they don't, they do. There is plenty of basis for thinking that we could indeed stop COVID-19 as a significant factor in our lives if we could achieve a high enough vaccination rate.Gil Dobie wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 4:25 pm
Actually both sides are putting out false information. The vaccine won't stop Covid, as the lefties are saying, but it makes things better. The lefties are not trying to tell people the truth, they are trying to force shit up people's Ass, and the other side is trying to force their shit up people's asses too.
Now, we will get to a point where we will have had so many infections that the situation will wane. But we will have had a lot more suffering than we would have had if we hadn't had this vaccine misinformation nonsense.
No vaccine has ever completely eliminated risk of infection and transmission. The idea is to reduce it to an extent sufficient to impede circulation of the virus and end the epidemic. The COVID-19 vaccines appear to be effective enough to accomplish that. But we have a critical mass of people in this country who are believing misinformation so we can't achieve the necessary vaccination rate.
Bottom line: The people who were saying 6 months ago and are continuing to say that we would be a lot better off as a population if we could get everybody vaccinated were and are telling the truth. The people who are saying otherwise are either lying or they are misinformed. It is not a "both are wrong" situation.
- SeattleGriz
- Supporter
- Posts: 16557
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
- I am a fan of: Montana
- A.K.A.: PhxGriz
Re: Coronavirus COVID-19
Oof. New UK data is out and it's even worse on breakthrough cases.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... eek-41.pdf
While it is true the vaccine currently reduces hospitalizations and deaths, I have questions about slide 21. This slide shows the seroprevalence in blood donors. Put another way, it shows the type of antibodies a person has against COVID.
On this particular slide, you have a showing of how many people have S protein antibodies, which the vaccine gives you in spades, and then you have the Nucleocapsid antibodies. The nucleocapsid is an inner "shell" that encases the genetic information,. (Please Google for a better description).
My point, is that if you had a breakthrough case, you should see nucleocapsid antibodies developed...right? Didn't you defeat the whole thing?
If you caught COVID, you should show N antibodies. Then why has the slope barely moved on N antibodies (red plots), especially in light of all the breakthrough cases? Has the vaccine "trained" the body to only worry about the S protein?
That would mean incomplete protection. What happens if the S protein mutates enough the S antibodies don't work anymore? The nucleocapsid is a very conserved portion of the virus, meaning it doesn't mutate much.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... eek-41.pdf
While it is true the vaccine currently reduces hospitalizations and deaths, I have questions about slide 21. This slide shows the seroprevalence in blood donors. Put another way, it shows the type of antibodies a person has against COVID.
On this particular slide, you have a showing of how many people have S protein antibodies, which the vaccine gives you in spades, and then you have the Nucleocapsid antibodies. The nucleocapsid is an inner "shell" that encases the genetic information,. (Please Google for a better description).
My point, is that if you had a breakthrough case, you should see nucleocapsid antibodies developed...right? Didn't you defeat the whole thing?
If you caught COVID, you should show N antibodies. Then why has the slope barely moved on N antibodies (red plots), especially in light of all the breakthrough cases? Has the vaccine "trained" the body to only worry about the S protein?
That would mean incomplete protection. What happens if the S protein mutates enough the S antibodies don't work anymore? The nucleocapsid is a very conserved portion of the virus, meaning it doesn't mutate much.
Last edited by SeattleGriz on Sat Oct 16, 2021 9:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz