Read the thread you damned muppet.
- Doc
Read the thread you damned muppet.
Doc Cam has a good point. Read the thread!! Abundant evidence has already provided in it. If we provide you with more evidence, you will undoubtedly ignore it, just as you almost always ignore any evidence that conflicts with what you are already dead set on believing. Just like your Idol, Trump who still steadfastly believes the election was illegally stolen from him, despite the overwhelming evidence that it was not, which 60 different court cases, presided over by even by conservative judges, including at least 10 that Trump himself appointed!
Someone has already mentioned 'sample size' as a concern when looking at these sorts of statistics, and another thing to bear in mind is the base rate. The population's vaccination rate needs to be factored in when measuring the effectiveness of vaccinations. For example, for the sake of argument if we assume vaccinations have zero effectiveness then the expected rate of unvaccinated cases in California would be ~ 33% and ~ 67% of cases would be among the vaccinated. So, even if 50% of California's cases occurred in vaccinated persons it would be evidence that vaccination is effective; this is because the baseline for comparison is not 50/50, but 67/33. For your county, it would be 59/41.In the California county in which I live (one of California's red counties), the differences between vaccinated and un-vaccinated are not quite as pronounced. According to our county's covid dashboard, 59% of the population are fully vaccinated (disappointingly low, compared to the national average of 62.6% and the California average of 67%). There were 260 new cases reported yesterday, only 44.4% of which were unvaccinated. Of the cumulative total of covid patients who have been hospitalized, 89.4% were unvaccinated, but of the 31 people currently still hospitalized (9 in ICU), only 50% are unvaccinated.
There's still no difference in paying for Covid treatment of an unvaccinated person and paying for other health conditions that are the result of poor personal choices. The only real difference is which political party's voter base people who make these poor choices belong to. This is the real reason for the double standard. As it turns out obesity also increases your risk of hospitalization and death from Covid.Gunnar wrote: ↑Sun Jan 16, 2022 7:38 pmDoc Cam has a good point. Read the thread!! Abundant evidence has already provided in it. If we provide you with more evidence, you will undoubtedly ignore it, just as you almost always ignore any evidence that conflicts with what you are already dead set on believing. Just like your Idol, Trump who still steadfastly believes the election was illegally stolen from him, despite the overwhelming evidence that it was not, which 60 different court cases, presided over by even by conservative judges, including at least 10 that Trump himself appointed!
Vaccines, masks, and quarantines have done very little to slow the spread of omicron. There cost has been far more than the benefits these measures provided, especially the quarantines which are de facto lockdowns.
Everything you blabber has been shown to be false. Here's an idea, why don't you back up your claims for once? Are you just afraid to be laughed at by another Brietbart link? How about something credible. Actual evidence to prove your claims above.
This is the UK report. To be clear, it's from December 6, about two weeks from their first detected Omicron cases, and was based on looking at 581 Omicron cases. And they note "Given the small numbers of Omicron cases in this first analysis, the Omicron estimates are subject to significant uncertainty with wide confidence intervals and will be refined in future analyses."Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: ↑Fri Jan 14, 2022 6:09 pm0% -_-
That’s absolute horse crap, and that’s a moronic antivaxxer talking point. It’s ~40% for the two shots and no booster. But whatevs. Keep spreading misinformation - it’s not like quoting your own study back to you has any effect whatsoever.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-re ... ives/96172
- Doc
A two-dose series with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine provided just under 40% protection against symptomatic infection with the Omicron variant about 25 weeks after the second dose compared with around 60% protection against Delta, a technical briefing released by the U.K. Health Security Agency found.
My original claim to you that started all this was "vaccines aren't very effective against Omicron infection unless you've had a booster shot".In the Danish study, there was no significant protection against Omicron infection beyond 31 days after the second dose of BNT162b2, with significant negative VE estimates 91-150 days after the second dose. We also observed a pattern of non-existent, or even negative VE in Ontario.
Who are you quoting when you say, “very effective”? You’ve been stating from the outset that two doses have “little to no” effectiveness (viewtopic.php?p=2760850#p2760850), which I showed wasn’t true using your own citation. I also stated:cinepro wrote: ↑Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:53 pmDo you still disagree? Do you even consider a vaccine that is ~35-40% at best effective to be "very effective"?
I agree that everyone should be vaxxed and boosted. But we shouldn't be surprised when vaxxed people test positive, or expect to end the pandemic (as measured through cases) through vaccination.
From the Danish study, AGAIN:You don’t consider a 35-40% vaccine effectiveness against infection successful? Regardless, I see RI has a lower VE, but even 23% VE against infection has huge upside combined with the other protections afforded by it, no? I don’t really understand what you’re getting at.
- Doc
<- That’s pre-booster shot.Vaccine effectiveness was reduced to around 40% against symptoms and 80% against severe illness for omicron in the fully vaccinated