Chinese "Devil Virus" - anyone worried?
- Thread starter manwithnoname
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
He should instead of being in charge.
You should see the opposition.
Was it the guardian or telegraph that was last week saying that over half of covid hospitalisations were actually initially admitted with other complaints?
No idea. Didn't see that. I'd like to see supporting stats if that is the case. Theorising it's certainly possible without significant testing, since obviously the vast majority of people still go to hospital for other complaints.
Regardless I think you still need consent.
It was the Telegraph and it turned out to be a load of shite. It's between 20-25%.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statisti...07/Primary-Diagnosis-Supplement-20210729.xlsx
Still a big number.
In any case, we have another situation where two sides are espousing two contradictory viewpoints, with apparent evidence to back them up. It's one of the problems I have with the way of the world now. It's hard to know who's telling the truth a lot of the time. Truth doesn't even matter, to be honest, if enough people believe the same lie.
That's how Trump rode the wave didn't he. A well accepted fact now.
Yeah, it's scary. He made it more overt, but all politicians do it. These Tories aren't far behind Trump.
That may be so but generally speaking you can still find yourself in the middle ground by using a bit of common sense.
Within the last 10 minutes, I've read an article that says 0.004% of vaccinated people in America have contracted the virus, while another stated that 74% of people who contracted Covid in Massachusetts were fully vaccinated. Both sets of data were from the CDC.
What are you supposed to fucking believe? Everything is all over the place like a mad woman's piss.
You're supposed to be able to read, and think.
1) the .004 percent is a stupid statistic. The denominator is all vaccinated people in all of the USA, regardless of exposure. The numerator is those who have tested positive, during a time where the cdc wasn't interested in tracking breakthroughs, mostly pre delta cases, and during a relative lull in transmission. It's not reflective of anything. It's true, and also trivia.
2) the thing you read did not say that. It was talking about contact tracing in Provincetown, for one outbreak over multiple days. The actual data from that outbreak is pretty ugly, and can't sustain any specific quantifiable result, but it was well enough to show that unvaccinated transmission wasn't rare. The population in question in town is a very specific one, it's super gay, affluent, and liberal. Cool town, but makes me feel fat, such is the beef on display. That is not the data for mass. It was an overwhelmingly vaccinated subset of a state that has better vaccination rates than the uk. If the vast majority of a group are vaccinated, then breakthrough cases will dominate, just as they do in the uks elderly population.
3) believe the data only so much as you know how it was collected and you can interpret it. It is fairly clear that the vaccines are extremely effective. They reduce infection chance by 3 or 4, hospitalization by 20 or so, and death but at least an order of magnitude. The uks own data is probably the best to see this.
My point is that it's what they're implying with contradictory stories like that. One was intended to imply the vaccine is super effective, while the other is implying that it hardly offers any protection. The vast, vast majority of people aren't going to look into and analyse the data, they're gonna take what they're spoonfed and think what they're told to think, and the media know that. Media and politicians need to be more responsible with what they say, but they're not, and they constantly churn out contradictory messages that leave us in a bit of a 'boy who cried wolf' situation. They know what they're doing as well, so why do it?
In yet another unexpected and unwelcome twist in the pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released on Friday a report strongly suggesting that fully immunized people with so-called breakthrough infections of the Delta variant can spread the virus to others just as readily as unvaccinated people.
The vaccines remain powerfully effective against severe illness and death, and the agency said infections in vaccinated people were comparatively rare. But the revelation follows a series of other recent findings about the Delta variant that have upended scientists’ understanding of the coronavirus.
In the new report, which was intended to explain the agency’s sudden revision to its masking advice for vaccinated Americans, the C.D.C. described an outbreak in Provincetown, Mass., this month that quickly mushroomed to 470 cases in Massachusetts alone, as of Thursday.
Three-quarters of the infected were fully immunized, and the Delta variant was found in most of the samples that were genetically analyzed. Vaccinated and unvaccinated people who were infected carried high levels of the virus, the agency reported.
The vaccines remain powerfully effective against severe illness and death, and the agency said infections in vaccinated people were comparatively rare. But the revelation follows a series of other recent findings about the Delta variant that have upended scientists’ understanding of the coronavirus.
In the new report, which was intended to explain the agency’s sudden revision to its masking advice for vaccinated Americans, the C.D.C. described an outbreak in Provincetown, Mass., this month that quickly mushroomed to 470 cases in Massachusetts alone, as of Thursday.
Three-quarters of the infected were fully immunized, and the Delta variant was found in most of the samples that were genetically analyzed. Vaccinated and unvaccinated people who were infected carried high levels of the virus, the agency reported.
Nope. You need to look up the definition of a vaccine.
That's saying vaccines stop the virus being as serious, and make it less likely to catch it in the first place. But in the unlikely case that you do catch it, you're as likely to spread it as if you are unvaccinated.
Sounds like vaccines are working? What am I missing?
Sounds like vaccines are working? What am I missing?
More doublethink. The vaccines are safe, but they're not working. Don't panic, but you should be afraid.
So you're unlikely to get it if you're vaccinated, but if you get it you're equally likely to spread it to vaccinated and unvaccinated people. I think you're missing the bit where you are inexplicably special and have specific protection conferred upon you alone by God almighty himself.
I've got a solution! Don't read shit news! Definitely don't read just the headlines of shit news! And absolutely, in no situation, do you take seriously the news as presented in clips on social media, or as regurgitated by irresponsible people onto a football forum.
Where did you get that bit from?
"Three-quarters of the infected were fully immunized" + the average vaccination rate being <75%
I don't watch the news or read newspapers. This shit is still happening, though. I read that entire article. I agree the truth and correct interpretation of that article is what Gerry said.
But hey, I'm sure we won't be embarking on a perpetual cycle of lockdowns, mandates, vaccines and booster shots for years to come. Anti-protest legislation will be repealed, criticism of British politicians by journalists won't be a criminal offence. This will all be sorted soon. We just need to stick together. This is all for our own good. Anyone worried or concerned or asking questions is overreacting and a tinfoil hat conspiracy nut.
Oh, the sample size of 470 people. Right.