Ben Shapiro lies about Omicron and vaccines

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Sure. And let’s say if everyone only got the two shots and no boosters, given what we’ve sourced and quoted on this thread what percentage of the population, again given the evidence, would be vaccine effective against infection?

- Doc

Depending on how long it had been since they got the two shots, the number seems to be somewhere between 30% and 0%.

But if we're talking about Omicron, I'm not sure the timeline for new vaccinations even works out. By the time newly vaxxed people could get their two shots and have them take full effect, I strongly suspect Omicron will be in the rearview mirror. Might be good preparation for the next variant though.

0% -_-

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

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.

- Doc

[K Graham]

I actually first heard this idiotic claim on Newsmax the other day but I guess FOX decided they weren't going to be outdone in the stupid lying dept.

Fox News’ latest vaccine lie: The COVID vaccine makes you more likely to contract COVID

Amid a surge in COVID-19 cases due to the omicron variant, Fox New​​s has been relentlessly undermining the vaccination effort, including by recklessly misinterpreting a Danish study on vaccine efficacy against the omicron variant.

The study, circulated by professional COVID-19 “contrarian” Alex Berenson and mentioned in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, was originally published on medRxiv, a website for preliminary studies that have not been peer-reviewed. A warning on the website states the studies “should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.”

This warning did not stop Fox hosts and personalities from citing the study and cherry-picking data to claim that vaccination makes it more likely for an individual to contract COVID-19. The study found that 90 days post “vaccine protection,” or the date 14 days post-second dose, both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine had negative vaccine efficacy. The authors of the study, however, explained the unusual result as “different behaviour and/or exposure patterns in the vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts causing underestimation of the vaccine efficacy.”

In an email to PolitiFact, one of the authors of the study also suggested that the negative efficacy could be explained by the fact that vaccinated people may test more than unvaccinated people and an overrepresentation of vaccinated people in the studied cohort. Furthermore, Fox hosts and personalities failed to convey the authors’ conclusion that “booster vaccination offers a significant increase in protection” and that their “findings highlight the need for massive rollout of vaccinations and booster vaccinations.”

Here are the times that Fox News misrepresented the Danish study or inaccurately stated that vaccines are ineffective against omicron:

Host Tucker Carlson: “Research suggests that it's possible the vaccinated are more likely to get and transmit this virus than the unvaccinated are”

Carlson: “A recent study in the Netherlands, for example, found that so-called secondary attack rate — that means the spread of COVID within a household — is higher in double vaccinated individuals than in the unvaccinated. That would be ‘pandemic of the vaccinated.’”

Carlson: “There is evidence that people who get the booster are more likely to get the latest variant.”

Carlson: “There's a lot of evidence — a steaming pile of evidence, in fact — that this vaccine, the so-called booster, the third vax is negatively correlated to the new variant. You’re more likely to get it and pass it on. So crazy.”

Co-host Rachel Campos-Duffy: “Why are we forcing people to get vaccinated when you’re more likely to get the virus if you’re vaccinated in the variant that we have right now?”

Anchor Martha MacCallum: “One preprint study found that after 30 days, the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines no longer had a statistically significant positive effect against omicron. After 90 days, it went negative. For example, vaccinated people were more susceptible to omicron infection. Based on data from Denmark and Canada, vaccinated people had higher rates of omicron infection than unvaccinated people. I mean, this is just enough to make your head spin.”

MacCallum: “I read these stories in The Wall Street Journal about studies from Denmark and studies from Ontario that show the vaccinated might be more likely to contract omicron. … I don't know if these things are accurate.” (The Canadian study referenced was also published on the not-yet-peer-reviewed site medRxiv, and it concluded that a third vaccination dose “provides some protection in the immediate term,” against the omicron variant, but conceded it was “substantially less” than against the delta variant.)

Host Laura Ingraham: “And more shocking is the new data that the vaccinated are more likely to contract omicron than the unvaccinated.”

Ingraham Angle guest Alex Berenson: “The vaccines are not just not controlling infection or transmission, but actually accelerating infection and transmission in omicron.”

Fox News Primetime guest Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) cited the Denmark study to declare that the “vaccine no longer works.”

Why TF is FOX News allowed to broadcast???

[K Graham]

Depending on how long it had been since they got the two shots, the number seems to be somewhere between 30% and 0%.

But if we're talking about Omicron, I'm not sure the timeline for new vaccinations even works out. By the time newly vaxxed people could get their two shots and have them take full effect, I strongly suspect Omicron will be in the rearview mirror. Might be good preparation for the next variant though.

0% -_-

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

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.

- Doc

dont-move-that-pawn-its-checkmate-in-one-move.jpg (116.17 KiB) Viewed 450 times

[K Graham]

I have to wonder how history will look back on the GOP during COVID.

2020: "I can't believe I have to say this, but don't drink bleach."

2021: "I can't believe I have to say this, but don't eat horse paste."

2022: "I can't believe I have to say this, but .... f--k it. Drink your own piss. Drink as much as you can."

[Some Schmo]

Darwin awards for every unvaccinated victim of COVID. Congrats!

I can't think of a more appropriate punishment for being such an idiot. COVID is thinning out the idiots, so at least we've got that going for us.

[Some Schmo]

There should be at least a $5000 surcharge to be admitted at any hospital if you can't show proof of vaccination. Your health insurance premiums should also double.

We don't need mandates, we need real financial repercussions for being an idiot and an asshole.

[ajax18]

There should be at least a $5000 surcharge to be admitted at any hospital if you can't show proof of vaccination. Your health insurance premiums should also double.

We don't need mandates, we need real financial repercussions for being an idiot and an asshole.

Aren't you the free market libertarian all of the sudden? Why not require people to lose weight and give up sugar in the same way? Maybe stop letting them use their EBT cards at McDonald's?

Instead you reward your voting base (many on my 600lb. life) with welfare and universal free healthcare while encouraging unwed motherhood and the welfare queen culture of generational dependency and poverty.

[canpakes]

There should be at least a $5000 surcharge to be admitted at any hospital if you can't show proof of vaccination. Your health insurance premiums should also double.

We don't need mandates, we need real financial repercussions for being an idiot and an asshole.

Aren't you the free market libertarian all of the sudden? Why not require people to lose weight and give up sugar in the same way? Maybe stop letting them use their EBT cards at McDonald's?

Instead you reward your voting base (many on my 600lb. life) with welfare and universal free healthcare while encouraging unwed motherhood and the welfare queen culture of generational dependency and poverty.

Slow down. You’re trying too hard to sound like someone who just blurts out silly partisan talking points that aren’t factual or reality-based.

As example, McDonalds doesn’t accept EBT cards. Same for most other fast food places.

https://frugalreality.com/does-mcdonalds-accept-ebt/

[Gunnar]

There should be at least a $5000 surcharge to be admitted at any hospital if you can't show proof of vaccination. Your health insurance premiums should also double.

We don't need mandates, we need real financial repercussions for being an idiot and an asshole.

Aren't you the free market libertarian all of the sudden? Why not require people to lose weight and give up sugar in the same way? Maybe stop letting them use their EBT cards at McDonald's?

Do you honestly not see how stupid that remark is!?! Obesity is not contagious! No one's life or health is endangered merely by associating with or being in the presence of someone who is obese or who over-indulges in sugary foods. On the other hand, all who catch covid because they refuse to get vaccinated and/or refuse to take the precaution of masking while in close proximity to others endanger not only themselves, but also others with whom they come in contact--especially others who are immune compromised or can't get vaccinated for some reason. Do you deny that?

Instead you reward your voting base (many on my 600lb. life) with welfare and universal free healthcare while encouraging unwed motherhood and the welfare queen culture of generational dependency and poverty.

No one here is encouraging unwed motherhood, and nothing is more conducive to unwed motherhood and a "welfare queen culture of generational dependency and poverty" than banning all abortions, including cases involving rape or incest, and nothing will more surely reduce the abortion rate than allowing women freedom of choice in matters concerning their own reproductive health, including abortion and (especially) contraception.

ETA; As for universal healthcare, no one here is suggesting that it will be free. It must be paid for via taxation, but study after study in nation after nation that has it, has shown rather conclusively that the cost of such a system to individual taxpayers is far less than the cost of the insurance premiums now demanded by avaricious, for-profit, commercial health insurance companies. Even the study funded by the far right, highly conservative Koch Brothers found that to be true (much their surprise and disappointment, I would guess)! On the other hand, though, maybe that was the result they hoped to find, because they wished to reap some of the health insurance industry's lucrative profits for themselves.

[ajax18]

Vaccinated people and masked people are spreading Omicron. Show me the evidence that masks or vaccinations are slowing the spread rather than metely delaying the inevitable.