Select to expand quote

remery said..
Or if the product had not been invented, many people would have died and the health system collapsed.

This idea that getting Covid vaccinated has saved the health system is unfortunately not playing out in NSW hospitals.

What stopped a lot of the hospital admissions was the initial lockdowns but we couldn't live like that forever.

Latest hospitalisations/ICU NSW week ending 15th December.


www.health.nsw.gov.au/Infectious/covid-19/Documents/weekly-covid-overview-20221210.pdf

Select to expand quote

Flying Dutchman said..

remery said..
Or if the product had not been invented, many people would have died and the health system collapsed.

This idea that getting Covid vaccinated has saved the health system is unfortunately not playing out in NSW hospitals.

What stopped a lot of the hospital admissions was the initial lockdowns but we couldn't live like that forever.

Latest hospitalisations/ICU NSW week ending 15th December.


www.health.nsw.gov.au/Infectious/covid-19/Documents/weekly-covid-overview-20221210.pdf

As usual miss the statistics totally.
So unvaccinated, that is a tiny part of the population, make up over 12% of deaths. Hmmm not good. I include unknown as unvaxed as you would, quite sure if they do not know they have not had it.

And the elephant in the room

Select to expand quote

ok said..

remery said..

Florida, the pinnacle of ignorance.

What's your occupation / credentials Remery ? Must be pretty intelligent to be smarter than a whole state of Florida and its constituents. A state that has a similar population to the whole of Australia

In Florida 83,606 people have died of COVID. But Florida doesn't have as many people as Australia, so adjusting for population we have 101,127 corrected deaths. But anti-vaxxers will say that there are more old people in Florida than Australia. So, while its barely statistically correct, lets do an extremely rough adjustment of 21.3 percent for Florida over 65's and a mere 16.2 percent over 65's in Australia.

This reduces Florida's comparative deaths from COVID to 76,913.

How many people died of COVID in Australia you ask?... 16,940.

So basically 4.54 times as many ignorant Floridians died of COVID than Australians.

Select to expand quote

remery said..
In Florida 83,606 people have died of COVID. But Florida doesn't have as many people as Australia, so adjusting for population we have 101,127 corrected deaths. But anti-vaxxers will say that there are more old people in Florida than Australia. So, while its barely statistically correct, lets do an extremely rough adjustment of 21.3 percent for Florida over 65's and a mere 16.2 percent over 65's in Australia.

This reduces Florida's comparative deaths from COVID to 76,913.

How many people died of COVID in Australia you ask?... 16,940.

So basically 4.54 times as many ignorant Floridians died of COVID than Australians.

Florida has about 5% more people over 60 (hardest hit demographic), and a population density something like 50x more per km2. Florida's all-cause mortality rates are lower than Australia's too, especially given the current spike of 16-22% in Oz (depending on source).

I'm not sure I'd call that in Australia's favor.

However, decisions individual Floridians made has nothing to do with whether or not the vaccine is an effective product -- completely different dataset.

Select to expand quote

remery said..
Or if the product had not been invented, many people would have died and the health system collapsed.

Data disagrees. Mo' vaccines, mo' death.



And the UK saw the same lack of hospital "collapse" that models predicted. Remember the Nightingale hospitals that were built in early 2020 to cope with the flood of patients? Yeah, they all shut down in a couple of months because there were no patients.



If the products are as effective as you claim they are... why don't we see that in the data?

Select to expand quote

Kamikuza said..

remery said..
Or if the product had not been invented, many people would have died and the health system collapsed.

Data disagrees. Mo' vaccines, mo' death.



And the UK saw the same lack of hospital "collapse" that models predicted. Remember the Nightingale hospitals that were built in early 2020 to cope with the flood of patients? Yeah, they all shut down in a couple of months because there were no patients.



If the products are as effective as you claim they are... why don't we see that in the data?

My trap question can be explained with the data we now have. But I guess if you've had 4 jabs that haven't been studied for long term health issues you're going to live in denial until you "died suddenly" or get a "rare side effect"

Select to expand quote

ok said..
My trap question can be explained with the data we now have.

Right, so the data we have is not showing what people have been claiming since before we had it and after we have a mountain of it Frankly, it's embarrassing to hear people say things like "it saved (insert imaginary number) lives and protected our hospital systems".

Rare side effects? Better than getting COVID though right? And how about that Long COVID?

Wonder if Australian media will touch this.




twitter.com/davidzweig/status/1607378386338340867

Select to expand quote

Flying Dutchman said..
Wonder if Australian media will touch this.




twitter.com/davidzweig/status/1607378386338340867

Why would anyone touch this? Who is this guy and why are his views important? Why would a journalist want to publish something that is just a few screenshots from someone's opinion on twitter?

Its not even earth shattering. If you have a pandemic and people are dropping like flies, and you think that vaccination is the only way out, what else would you do? Would you let any idiot stand on a soapbox and tell the world that 'it's just a hoax' or 'ivermectin is the answer'? No, you would try and encourage people to take the vaccines.

Who said vaccination was the only way out? You call what was pushed a vaccine? That's generous.

Select to expand quote

Flying Dutchman said..
Who said vaccination was the only way out? You call what was pushed a vaccine? That's generous.

Ahh, that's where understanding things in context is required. Let's assume I was talking about the government.

Let's also not go off onto tangents about whether you think it was a vaccine or not. I think it was/is. You don't seem to think it meets the definition of a vaccine.

But what you have posted is not news-worthy. No one gives a crap that someone random says something about twitter and what people with 20/20 hindsight have to say.

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said..
No one gives a crap that someone random says something about twitter and what people with 20/20 hindsight have to say.

No one gives a crap?
33 million views in less than 24 hrs suggests otherwise.

Select to expand quote

Flying Dutchman said..

FormulaNova said..
No one gives a crap that someone random says something about twitter and what people with 20/20 hindsight have to say.

No one gives a crap?
33 million views in less than 24 hrs suggests otherwise.

Oooohhhhh.... "Views"

On Twitter! Wow! That will surely be very influential people that will actively go out and change the world... or just repost **** on Twitter (I'm not sure which)

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said..
On Twitter! Wow! That will surely be very influential people that will actively go out and change the world... or just repost **** on Twitter (I'm not sure which)

I'm not a massive fan of Twitter either but there's many influential people using it at the moment. Social media is where many in the public are getting their news and sharing information.

I'd take the peer-reviewed journal Nature over Twitter.

"There is considerable interest in the waning of effectiveness of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and vaccine effectiveness (VE) of booster doses. Using linked national Brazilian databases, we undertook a test-negative design study involving almost 14 million people (~16 million tests) to estimate VE of CoronaVac over time and VE of BNT162b2 booster vaccination against RT-PCR-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes (hospitalization or death). Compared with unvaccinated individuals, CoronaVac VE at 14-30 d after the second dose was 55.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 54.3-55.7) against confirmed infection and 82.1% (95% CI: 81.4-82.8) against severe outcomes. VE decreased to 34.7% (95% CI: 33.1-36.2) against infection and 72.5% (95% CI: 70.9-74.0) against severe outcomes over 180 d after the second dose. A BNT162b2 booster, 6 months after the second dose of CoronaVac, improved VE against infection to 92.7% (95% CI: 91.0?94.0) and VE against severe outcomes to 97.3% (95% CI: 96.1?98.1) 14-30 d after the booster. Compared with younger age groups, individuals 80 years of age or older had lower protection after the second dose but similar protection after the booster. Our findings support a BNT162b2 booster vaccine dose after two doses of CoronaVac, particularly for the elderly.

www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01701-w

Select to expand quote

remery said..
I'd take the peer-reviewed journal Nature over Twitter.

"There is considerable interest in the waning of effectiveness of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and vaccine effectiveness (VE) of booster doses. Using linked national Brazilian databases, we undertook a test-negative design study involving almost 14 million people (~16 million tests) to estimate VE of CoronaVac over time and VE of BNT162b2 booster vaccination against RT-PCR-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes (hospitalization or death). Compared with unvaccinated individuals, CoronaVac VE at 14-30 d after the second dose was 55.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 54.3-55.7) against confirmed infection and 82.1% (95% CI: 81.4-82.8) against severe outcomes. VE decreased to 34.7% (95% CI: 33.1-36.2) against infection and 72.5% (95% CI: 70.9-74.0) against severe outcomes over 180 d after the second dose. A BNT162b2 booster, 6 months after the second dose of CoronaVac, improved VE against infection to 92.7% (95% CI: 91.0?94.0) and VE against severe outcomes to 97.3% (95% CI: 96.1?98.1) 14-30 d after the booster. Compared with younger age groups, individuals 80 years of age or older had lower protection after the second dose but similar protection after the booster. Our findings support a BNT162b2 booster vaccine dose after two doses of CoronaVac, particularly for the elderly.

www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01701-w

Don't let science get in the way of a good twitter rant.

"I know one person who ...."

Select to expand quote

remery said..
www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01701-w

That study is pretty old now?

"Our findings support a BNT162b2 booster vaccine dose after two doses of CoronaVac, particularly for the elderly."

They are up to vaccine #5 now.

Select to expand quote

hilly said..
Don't let science get in the way of a good twitter rant.

Which science? This science?

Select to expand quote

Flying Dutchman said..

hilly said..
Don't let science get in the way of a good twitter rant.

Which science? This science?

Oh dear. I guess this is why there is a divide. Logical people accept that there has been a shift in understanding as we learn. Yes, people learn.

But no, "they lied". Can you see why people would think you are a conspiracy theorist for posting this stuff? A rational person would see why beliefs were a certain way and then why they changed. A conspiracy theorists that seems incapable of the good old "critical thinking" just gets confused with logic and thinks "they lied". Because they just don't want to understand and want to believe they are special because they knew it from the outset.

News flash - "it's easy to be skeptical or critical of anything." Wait long enough and you could be right about anything.

Bring back the nutbag beliefs that Bill Gates wants to depopulate the world by vaccinating people... at least that has some logic in it that is interesting to argue about, even if its not quite what the typical CT nutter thinks.

I think they (nut bag CTists) are just not happy with life and need something (one) to blame as they perceive they drew the short straw in life. They really need to get out and smell the roses because we live in an amazing time. Western society is so rich and safe compared to anything in the past. My parents lived through WW2 getting bombed every night. Not much I can complain about growing up in Oz in the 70s and 80s.

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said..
Oh dear. I guess this is why there is a divide. Logical people accept that there has been a shift in understanding as we learn. Yes, people learn.

I agree, I don't like the title of this video. "They're incompetent" would be more accurate.

I remember thinking at the time when Fauci, Walensky, Biden, etc were making claims that the vaccine would give you protection/stop you from transmitting it that what they were saying was BS....they didn't have data to back up their claims. And I'm not a scientist or Dr. So either I'm a genius or these people are seriously incompetent & I'd say it's the latter.

Select to expand quote

hilly said..
I think they (nut bag CTists) are just not happy with life and need something (one) to blame as they perceive they drew the short straw in life. They really need to get out and smell the roses because we live in an amazing time. Western society is so rich and safe compared to anything in the past. My parents lived through WW2 getting bombed every night. Not much I can complain about growing up in Oz in the 70s and 80s.

Hard to tell this to a vax injured person unfortunately.

Select to expand quote

remery said..
Florida, the pinnacle of ignorance.

Just found this video... is it Florida that is ignorant or us?

Select to expand quote

Flying Dutchman said..

FormulaNova said..
Oh dear. I guess this is why there is a divide. Logical people accept that there has been a shift in understanding as we learn. Yes, people learn.

I agree, I don't like the title of this video. "They're incompetent" would be more accurate.

I remember thinking at the time when Fauci, Walensky, Biden, etc were making claims that the vaccine would give you protection/stop you from transmitting it that what they were saying was BS....they didn't have data to back up their claims. And I'm not a scientist or Dr. So either I'm a genius or these people are seriously incompetent & I'd say it's the latter.

We almost agree on something, at least the title of the video bit.

But to say they are incompetent is a bit of a stretch. How many people do you know who have been through a world-wide pandemic? Of those, how many are in politics? I am guessing 'zero' is the answer to both questions. Your recollection is probably the same as others where people jump to the negative.

So why would you think people that have never experienced something are incompetent? No one really expected to see this sort of thing in their lifetime, and only the authors or researchers in this field would have really expected it to happen at all.

As for vaccines, I recall that there has never been a vaccine for these type of viruses as it has been too difficult. Seemingly for the same reason that they now say that they are almost impossible, i.e. the upper respiratory system is very difficult to control. So why wouldn't it be reasonable for people to both believe that their new vaccines did work and then find that they had the same limitations?

Just to help you out, no you are not a genius. A genius would probably see these things as self-evident and normal human behavior and thus not even worthy of discussing. Clearly I am not one either.

For future reference, people in government, in politics, are not that different to the rest of us. They are not geniuses. They do not get things right all the time. Sometimes not at all. So why would you assume that they should for something they have never seen?

I was not a fan of ScoMo, but I cut him a lot of slack for decisions he made during this time, as he too had never experienced anything like this and why would you expect any politician to be any better?

Select to expand quote

hilly said..
I think they (nut bag CTists) are just not happy with life and need something (one) to blame as they perceive they drew the short straw in life. They really need to get out and smell the roses because we live in an amazing time. Western society is so rich and safe compared to anything in the past. My parents lived through WW2 getting bombed every night. Not much I can complain about growing up in Oz in the 70s and 80s.

We'll, I've got a vaccine injury, I know there are shorter straws. Although you do have a good point, I took the kids to the beach Christmas morning, hundreds of people there and no problems, everyone just minding their own business politely. It's pretty good. And the price of this niceness is not going on a rampage against all those who violated my rights. Financial compensation will have to suffice, and by hook or by crook I'm getting it.

Select to expand quote

psychojoe said..

hilly said..
I think they (nut bag CTists) are just not happy with life and need something (one) to blame as they perceive they drew the short straw in life. They really need to get out and smell the roses because we live in an amazing time. Western society is so rich and safe compared to anything in the past. My parents lived through WW2 getting bombed every night. Not much I can complain about growing up in Oz in the 70s and 80s.

We'll, I've got a vaccine injury, I know there are shorter straws. Although you do have a good point, I took the kids to the beach Christmas morning, hundreds of people there and no problems, everyone just minding their own business politely. It's pretty good. And the price of this niceness is not going on a rampage against all those who violated my rights. Financial compensation will have to suffice, and by hook or by crook I'm getting it.

Okay, I can't help it. I am going to bite.

Didn't you volunteer for a vaccine trial of something new/novel instead of what the rest of us got?

Didn't you then find out that your vaccine injury was actually diagnosed as something else?

From what you have posted up here, your vaccine injury seems a bit different.

On the other hand, you have had bad bad luck. An otherwise healthy person that is very anti-vax, and what do you know, you got an injury. Rotten luck, and I hope the compo sets you right.

Select to expand quote

Kamikuza said..

remery said..
Or if the product had not been invented, many people would have died and the health system collapsed.

Data disagrees. Mo' vaccines, mo' death.



And the UK saw the same lack of hospital "collapse" that models predicted. Remember the Nightingale hospitals that were built in early 2020 to cope with the flood of patients? Yeah, they all shut down in a couple of months because there were no patients.



If the products are as effective as you claim they are... why don't we see that in the data?

Don't you see description on the left?
Death Rate among SEVERE CASES.

What if vaccination cause that people almost do not suffer SEVERE ? almost non at all? If protection is 99.995% and just one person get suffer and died?

Probably not.
You cant see or understand relation in this graph.

This is a mainly reason that complicated stuff should be left to specialists in area to analyze, not just plain mob drawing missleading conclusions. That statement could be true re all fields of expertise.

Select to expand quote

Macroscien said..

Kamikuza said..

remery said..
Or if the product had not been invented, many people would have died and the health system collapsed.

Data disagrees. Mo' vaccines, mo' death.



And the UK saw the same lack of hospital "collapse" that models predicted. Remember the Nightingale hospitals that were built in early 2020 to cope with the flood of patients? Yeah, they all shut down in a couple of months because there were no patients.



If the products are as effective as you claim they are... why don't we see that in the data?

Don't you see description on the left?
Death Rate among SEVERE CASES.

What if vaccination cause that people almost do not suffer SEVERE ? almost non at all? If protection is 99.995% and just one person get suffer and died?

Probably not.
You cant see or understand relation in this graph.

This is a mainly reason that complicated stuff should be left to specialists in area to analyze, not just plain mob drawing missleading conclusions. That statement could be true re all fields of expertise.

Top graph? Severe cases are by definition those that require hospitalization...

You're making spurious connections and that point is invalid.

What the data is showing is that the more vaccines you have, when you develop a severe case of COVID you are at higher risk of negative outcomes ie. death.

Vaccines protecting from severe cases would be a different data set ... but what that data is showing is again mo' vaccine, mo' severe cases, especially for those at greater risk of COVID ie. over 60s. It really isn't looking good for mRNA vaccines, which is disappointing.

The vaccines are promoted as giving protection from death and severe illness (ie. hospitalization) and ... they just don't. Even Pfizer/Moderna admit that "protection" is somewhere in the order of 30% and wanes rapidly, requiring multiple boosters and we see how well that works with side-effects of negative outcomes and other complications.

You're right, this is complicated stuff ... that has been dumbed down by experts in their field for general consumption. I can't see how you can argue with the data in the top graph, it really is quite simple.

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said..
As for vaccines, I recall that there has never been a vaccine for these type of viruses as it has been too difficult. Seemingly for the same reason that they now say that they are almost impossible, i.e. the upper respiratory system is very difficult to control. So why wouldn't it be reasonable for people to both believe that their new vaccines did work and then find that they had the same limitations?

Because extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

They didn't test if the vaccines "worked" -- and they still aren't. All they're testing for is an immune response to the vaccine's spike protein and if antibody titers get above a certain level (sometimes only in mice) they're declaring the vaccine effective. This is why they've had to walk back from "protects against infection and transmission at 99%" to whatever waffle they're using now.

It really has been a ****-show of rushed development and lack of proper testing ie. double-blind RCTs.

So without the extraordinary evidence, it's all just woo-woo. This is literally the sort of nonsense we scoff at from the crystal-waving vitamin-popping organic hippies.

This isn't anything new; medical reversals of treatments even with proper research and testing is very, very common.

But Bill said the vax was safe?