Vaccine Poll

[oldag]

What I posted is a Report and not a study. If you want that information, hunt it down (a Clue : check the links in the report). On second thought, don't. You'll just come back with some BS claim like you did with the study that they had contradicted themselves.

Report/Study? What difference does the terminology make? None. What is a report based on (or should be based on)? Study. You always look for ways to evade and not address the issue. This post is no exception.

Deaths are not constant year over year. They will vary from year to year, natural variation. Population increases, so number of deaths can increase solely due to that factor. The ONLY way to draw any conclusion from death counts is to analyze deaths as a percentage of the population and then perform a proper statistical analysis. See if the variation being reported for 2020 is within the normal variation (e.g., look at standard deviation). And then examine for causation, not just correlation.

Maybe deaths increased in a statistically meaningful manner in 2020. Maybe they didn't. What you have posted does not support drawing any conclusion. But hey, that never stopped you before.

Keep up the fear mongering and denial.

 

[DubiousDan]

Report/Study? What difference does the terminology make? None. What is a report based on (or should be based on)? Study. You always look for ways to evade and not address the issue. This post is no exception.

Keep up the fear mongering and denial.

What issue am I evading? I pointed you to the information.

The report is a summary of the studies. The studies can br found in the links. I'm not an errand boy so if you want that information go find it.

You continue to say what I post is wrong but offer nothing to back up your claims except a "cuz I said so".

 

[oldag]

What issue am I evading? I pointed you to the information.

The report is a summary of the studies. The studies can br found in the links. I'm not an errand boy so if you want that information go find it.

You continue to say what I post is wrong but offer nothing to back up your claims except a "cuz I said so".

Respond to this:
Deaths are not constant year over year. They will vary from year to year, natural variation. Population increases, so number of deaths can increase solely due to that factor. The ONLY way to draw any conclusion from death counts is to analyze deaths as a percentage of the population and then perform a proper statistical analysis. See if the variation being reported for 2020 is within the normal variation (e.g., look at standard deviation). And then examine for causation, not just correlation.

Do you still think that just reporting an increase in death numbers for 2020 backs up your fear mongering? Yes or no?

 

[DubiousDan]

Respond to this:
Deaths are not constant year over year. They will vary from year to year, natural variation. Population increases, so number of deaths can increase solely due to that factor. The ONLY way to draw any conclusion from death counts is to analyze deaths as a percentage of the population and then perform a proper statistical analysis. See if the variation being reported for 2020 is within the normal variation (e.g., look at standard deviation). And then examine for causation, not just correlation.

Do you still think that just reporting an increase in death numbers for 2020 backs up your fear mongering? Yes or no?

There are reports on deaths every year for a number of years. Until this year the number of deaths rose at at rate of approximately 2.5%. Based on that they can project the number of deaths to be expected for the current year. They would expect an increase of 2.5% more than the previous year. At the time the report was written there were already just under 300,000 more deaths that expected for that time period. They attribute 2/3 of those deaths to covid knowing the number of reported covid deaths. Knowing your trust issues you won't believe any numbers or any amount of proof. It's not fear mongering if it's factual.

The information you want is available if you really want it. I'm not interested in so I'm not going to waste my time looking for it again. You're the only one interested in it so go find it. On top of the I'm not sure you'd understand it anyway considering you claimed that they contradicted themselves in the excerpt of a study that you posted.

During March 1–December 31, 2020, state-issued mask mandates applied in 2,313 (73.6%) of the 3,142 U.S. counties. Mask mandates were associated with a 0.5 percentage point decrease (p = 0.02) in daily COVID-19 case growth rates 1–20 days after implementation and decreases of 1.1, 1.5, 1.7, and 1.8 percentage points 21–40, 41–60, 61–80, and 81–100 days, respectively, after implementation (p<0.01 for all) (Table 1) (Figure). Mask mandates were associated with a 0.7 percentage point decrease (p = 0.03) in daily COVID-19 death growth rates 1–20 days after implementation and decreases of 1.0, 1.4, 1.6, and 1.9 percentage points 21–40, 41–60, 61–80, and
81–100 days, respectively, after implementation (p<0.01 for all). Daily case and death growth rates before implementation of mask mandates were not statistically different from the reference period.

 

[oldag]

There are reports on deaths every year for a number of years. Until this year the number of deaths rose at at rate of approximately 2.5%. Based on that they can project the number of deaths to be expected for the current year. They would expect an increase of 2.5% more than the previous year. At the time the report was written there were already just under 300,000 more deaths that expected for that time period. They attribute 2/3 of those deaths to covid knowing the number of reported covid deaths. Knowing your trust issues you won't believe any numbers or any amount of proof. It's not fear mongering if it's factual.

The information you want is available if you really want it. I'm not interested in so I'm not going to waste my time looking for it again. You're the only one interested in it so go find it. On top of the I'm not sure you'd understand it anyway considering you claimed that they contradicted themselves in the excerpt of a study that you posted.

I see once again you evade and do not answer a specific yes or no question.

Have fun with your fearmongering.

 

[DubiousDan]

I see once again you evade and do not answer a specific yes or no question.

Have fun with your fearmongering.

Once again, you don't understand what you read or you're being deliberately obtuse. Also, that was a catch 22question like "do you still beat your wife, yes or no?"

There are reports on deaths every year for a number of years. Until this year the number of deaths rose at at rate of approximately 2.5%. Based on that they can project the number of deaths to be expected for the current year. They would expect an increase of 2.5% more than the previous year. At the time the report was written there were already just under 300,000 more deaths that expected for that time period. They attribute 2/3 of those deaths to covid knowing the number of reported covid deaths. Knowing your trust issues you won't believe any numbers or any amount of proof. It's not fear mongering if it's factual.

 

[DubiousDan]

I see once again you evade and do not answer a specific yes or no question.

Have fun with your fearmongering.

And before I forget the study, you referenced previously in support your views, whose numbers you depended on did not contain any of what you claim would be necessary to validate your numbers. Why is it you demand it from me but hold yourself to a lower standard?

 

[oldag]

And before I forget the study, you referenced previously in support your views, whose numbers you depended on did not contain any of what you claim would be necessary to validate your numbers. Why is it you demand it from me but hold yourself to a lower standard?

Take your lies elsewhere. I am done wasting electrons on you.

 

[DubiousDan]

Take your lies elsewhere. I am done wasting electrons on you.

Right, you still have nothing to back up your claims except "cuz I said so".

While my bathroom is just 100yards away now I'm still in enough of a foul mood to expend much effort in placating a troll.

 

[JeepFiend]

Don't have anything against the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, except that it is proving to not be fully vetted at this point. Not a huge fan of gene therapy. I don't eat GMO food, I don't have any intention of becoming a GMO human. Additionally, I took care of the wife who had covid for over 2 weeks. I suspect I have natural immunity already.

 

[DubiousDan]

Don't have anything against the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, except that it is proving to not be fully vetted at this point. Not a huge fan of gene therapy. I don't eat GMO food, I don't have any intention of becoming a GMO human. Additionally, I took care of the wife who had covid for over 2 weeks. I suspect I have natural immunity already.

Did you have a negative test? If not you may have had it without having any symptoms.

 

[JeepFiend]

Did you have a negative test? If not you may have had it without having any symptoms.

Well, she had it over the holidays and testing centers were closed. She tested positive on 12/19, but we didn't get results until 12/22. I got moderately ill, mostly light headed and fatigued, on 12/26 until about 12/28. Once I was able to test, my symptoms were gone and my test came back negative. She continued to test positive for two more tests. I've thought about getting the antibody test, but I've heard that a lot of those tests provide inaccurate results because in many cases, the T-cells are able to fend off the virus before sufficient antibodies are created to show up in a test.

 

[striker55]

Well, she had it over the holidays and testing centers were closed. She tested positive on 12/19, but we didn't get results until 12/22. I got moderately ill, mostly light headed and fatigued, on 12/26 until about 12/28. Once I was able to test, my symptoms were gone and my test came back negative. She continued to test positive for two more tests. I've thought about getting the antibody test, but I've heard that a lot of those tests provide inaccurate results because in many cases, the T-cells are able to fend off the virus before sufficient antibodies are created to show up in a test.

If you donate blood they test for antibodies.

 

[Lonesome Dove]

BTW will all of you who took this flu shot err I mean vaccine be lining up for the next one for the new deadlier strain

Its not a vaccine folks


98% survival rate

75% effectivity rate.


Hmm not a mathematician but 98 is higher than 75.

Never follow the numbers.
If you do you have to believe the current death toll numbers and I
highly doubt that you do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dawico]

.

 

[Mowingmaniac 24/7]

JF,

Not disputing what you said about GMO food, just curious how you can be certain you don't eat it?

 

[DubiousDan]

JF,

Not disputing what you said about GMO food, just curious how you can be certain you don't eat it?

Good observation. Also, I'm not sure what GMO has to do with the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. I'm not disputing it, I just don't know enough about it.

 

[Texas42]

If you donate blood they test for antibodies.

So, where I donate blood (directly part of the health system I work at) stopped testing antibodies. I feel this is mostly because they were looking for people to give convalescent plasma, which we are not using except in rare exceptions.

 

[JeepFiend]

JF,

Not disputing what you said about GMO food, just curious how you can be certain you don't eat it?

Well, I guess it would have been more accurate to say that I actively avoid it. I try to purchase all organic non-GMO food. But the sad fact is, all corn is gmo at this point, as is the High Fructose Corn Syrup that is in virtually everything you buy at the grocery store.

 

[JeepFiend]

Good observation. Also, I'm not sure what GMO has to do with the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. I'm not disputing it, I just don't know enough about it.

Absolutely nothing, it has to do with the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines that use messenger RNA to tell your cell structure to alter their functionality to create the S1 spike protein.