Coronavirus in the United States - news and thoughts

Simple. Those 3 are wrong. The UK and Israel data is too large to ignore. Both can't be right. That's impossible. So logic dictates that you go with the largest unbiased study. Very simple. But you keep thinking it's a debate. It's not.

 

One state. Possible. Two states? Less likely. Three states and other studies such as the recent CDC or Cleveland Clinic study done a few months ago? Then the likelihood of poor subject sampling as being the reason goes out the window.

 

That is not necessarily true. Since we do not yet understand the correlates of protection, correlates of breakthrough and correlates of severe disease, your hypothesis is flawed. You are attempting to draw conclusions to fit your predisposed bias without any understanding of the variables controlled and uncontrolled in all of the studies. Sorry, conclusive data analysis does not work that way.

The only position that can be defended right now is that I do not know which data set is accurate or inaccurate. It is possible that all data sets are accurate with properly defined conditions. For example, the panic over the Israeli data for severe disease and hospitalization was highly tilted towards a much older population that likely has significant health issues.

 

Study from Boston General finally starts to look at the virus kinetics in children. The study discredits the longheld, widespread misreprsentation that children do have high viral loads. This is a good first step towards accurately analyzing how this disease interacts with our children.

For those who oppose vaccinating children, there was some interesting data that show that severe disease did not correlate with higher RNA copy numbers as determined by RT-PCR. Seemingly validating that longheld belief that children are naturally much less susceptible to severe disease, though they may be effective carriers and spreaders of disease.

Virologic features of SARS-CoV-2 infection in children

 

This is from yesterday. CDC does NOT say natural immunity is better... they say the opposite. Have you been misinformed, not current or intellectually dishonest?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/11/01/what-works-better-vaccines-or-natural-immunity/

 

Do you realize how ignorant this sounds? Most published research findings turn out to be false. Again, the scientific method requires repeatable and predictable results. When study findings don't fall into the predictable and repeatable results, then the science isn't settled.

It would be easy just to say the largest is the right one, and just wipe away all results that don't align. But there's nothing scientific about that. Real scientists are going to ask why the results don't line up. Is it bias in one study? A different variable that wasn't accounted for in both studies? Something else?

And the studies can certainly have different results. Bias is a potential issue, and we've discussed two potential biases in the Israeli study. One bias in the Israeli study is it looked at only the Pfizer vaccine. Another potential bias is most of the study participants in Israel were homogenous, as they are descendants of Ashkenazi Jews for the most part. The participants in studies in places like Oklahoma, and especially in Alaska, are going to have significant genetic differences than those in Israel. Can you, or anyone say for certain that the differences in results between Israel and the states isn't due to the possibility that Ashkenazi Jews might have a slight, genetic advantage when it comes to creating a strong immune response to natural COVID infection? No. It's a possibility, and one that requires further study.

The matter simple isn't settled. Too many conflicting results. And just saying all the multiple study results that align with what you believe are wrong, without understanding why, isn't how science works.

 

There don't need to be any "properly defined conditions". It's simple. I believe the data coming from Israel and the UK. The data that is very small coming from the US is using "conditions" to make it seem like the vaccine is superior. I'll go with the large data set that doesn't have an ulterior motive like the CDC is doing(trying to get everyone vaxxed).

 

It's not ignorant at all. The fact is the Israeli study says NI is around 11 times better than the vaccine at preventing hospitalization. The US "data" say the vaccine is 5 times better than NI. Both can't be true. It's that simple. You are choosing to believe the CDC who has ulterior motives. Keep thinking there are genetic differences making up the disparity. You will die on this hill and it won't end well for you. It's ok to admit NI is superior. The best part is deep down I know you agree but are too far along in defending your position that you won't relent. That's what I take joy in. Knowing you know that natural immunity is superior.

 

I don't know the answer. The data doesn't present a clear picture. You think you know all the answers, but when there are multiple studies that all show different results, what do you think is the scientific best course of action? Simply state the largest is the best, all other data is bunk, and call it a day? Or try and continue the research to figure out why there are major discrepancies in results to try and explain that certain conditions will lead to different results to better understand what is happening?

I'm simply postulating one reason why the Israel data doesn't align with the data in three different US states. I could be wrong. But how can you be sure I'm not? Using the scientific method that requires predicable and repeatable results, there is no way any scientists can be certain. Hence why your posts are the height of ignorance. You claim absolute knowledge on a subject that hasn't shown any consistency in results at all.

 

THe CDC study is being blown to pieces, even by those hard for vaccines.

I dont have time today but the data manipulation is so bad. Plenty of Doctors and data experts are destroying this study.

On top of that, plenty who contributed to that study also has a financial interest in Phizer...

 

Some odd data coming out of UK.



Data comes from Deaths by vaccination status, England - Office for National Statistics

Note, data is 100k per each vaccine status. Why are vaccinated dying at a higher rate in that country from all causes of death?

 

Don't worry, some on here will continue to say the data "doesn't present a clear picture" LOL. Of course anyone with a functional brain will see that natural immunity is superior to the vaccine.

 

Not to argue, but the UK data is greatly confounded by different vaccines used at different times.

The Israeli data, at least in the first published data, provided no break down of ages affected, nor have they offered any insight into why there data is as it is.

I am not arguing, nor trying to convince you. I will respect your opinion, merely stating why mine is different.

 

Because the UK has a much, much greater percentage of people over 70 vaccinated than not. Old, infirm and those already dying. As has been pointed out, even if these people develop COVID, COVID may just be a complicating factor in an already poor health case.

 

How does an someone know that they are better protected without a vaccine? This is nonsensical if you mean unvaccinated and not having caught covid. If you mean those who caught covid already then perhaps they might think they're better protected, but the science isn't there yet--showing wide variations, some might be extremely well protected, others not or not at all. But reasearch is beginning to show that the durability of NI wanes as well, so those who might have been really well protected early on, will lose that protection over time.

So tell me, how do you get 100s of millions of people "in better shape?" It's pretty naive thinking even if it's a truism that society would be better off. This is why our response to a novel virus isn't "go out and run 7 or 8 miles" but developing vaccines and treatments.

Seems there is a disregard for the destructive effects and danger of infectious disease generally and covid specifically. It's disconcerting because a lot of people have gotten really sick or died as a result with more to come.

The flu is seasonal and epidemic, and only considered pandemic when a new strain emerges (think H1N1). This is why there isn't a vaccine mandate. Yet, there is extremely strong encouragement and a massive effort for many decades to surveil the flu.

Have fun on your run, just know that it's not doing anything to help the stop the spread of covid.

 

“Cases of reinfection with COVID-19 have been reported, but remain rare.“

COVID-19 and Your Health

“Vaccine breakthrough infections are expected.”

COVID-19 Vaccination

The data supports exactly what the cdc has to say on reinfections and break thoroughs…believe what you wish. The cdc certainly is not following what they know from the data.

 

No doubt 100s of millions are sadly not going to get in shape. There are consequences for life decisions. Forcing people to take a drug is not the answer. Especially one that fails to slow the spread. Aaron Rogers the most recent famous break through. Booster up.

 

I cant verify the accuracy of those graphs. Not sure where they are coming from. But assuming they are correct :


1. You picked all cause mortality, not just covid deaths
2. You picked the 10-59 year old group which is a very wide swath. The older part tends to be more vaccinated, the younger part doesn't, but younger people are at much less risk for covid.
3. If you look at the age adjusted covid deaths by vax status in the same data sets the vaccinated have much better outcomes.

 

Just had a conversation with someone saying the 50,000 reported breakthrough cases in Arizona alone proves the vaccine isn't working. When I responded that 50,000 out of 4.2 million is only 1.2%, and the vaccine was supposed to be no better than 95% effective, the data is showing the vaccine is more effective than advertised! The response was silence for a bit, then defiant gibberish about the vaccine not working.

I signed my 8-year old to get his first jab this Saturday. Everyone eligible should. It's the best way to be sure you are doing your part to slow the spread of COVID.

And according to ESPN, Rodgers is not considered vaccinated.

 

Yes, such as not getting the vaccine and not being able to work in their job (a choice), or getting sick and maybe dying, or spreading the virus (also a choice). Facts are that vaccines have slowed the spread among the vaccinated while considerably reducing disease, hospitalizations and deaths. They are the key to getting this under control. There are no good arguments against vaccinations, only bad ones.