covid-19

[billeisele 130]

1 hour ago, billvon said:

Right.  I went to the Florida data page, which is listed as the latest data they have.  This is what it said:

"Previous week (October 22, 2021 - October 28, 2021)  Published October 29, 2021"

Page is here: http://ww11.doh.state.fl.us/comm/_partners/covid19_report_archive/covid19-data/covid19_data_latest.pdf

Yes, that is data for that time period. The data on the map is data thru 11-2 and the last time reported. In this case it was 1:47 PM. It's interesting that you can drill down further and see detail data.

Regardless, what you show demonstrates one item I was addressing. One can't look at data at any one particular small snapshot of time and draw any accurate conclusions.

[Westerly 61]

9 hours ago, winsor said:

If the vaccines were anything as effective as everyone hoped, herd immunity would be a reality.  As it is, it is not even a consideration at this point.

 

 

They are more effective than predicted, a lot more effective. They were one of the most effective vaccines ever developed in human history actually. The problem is 45% of the entire US population is still unvaccinated and probably only 25% of the world population is vaccinated. That's kind of a problem when trying to get to herd immunity... If all this antivaxxer bullshit would cut the shit and get with the program, the virus would be extinct in the USA by now. I hope the vaccine mandates and restrictions for the unvaccinated keep piling on. The more pressure to get people to listen to science instead of Facebook, the better.

Edited November 3, 2021 by Westerly

[winsor 236]

3 hours ago, Westerly said:

They are more effective than predicted, a lot more effective. They were one of the most effective vaccines ever developed in human history actually. The problem is 45% of the entire US population is still unvaccinated and probably only 25% of the world population is vaccinated. That's kind of a problem when trying to get to herd immunity... If all this antivaxxer bullshit would cut the shit and get with the program, the virus would be extinct in the USA by now. I hope the vaccine mandates and restrictions for the unvaccinated keep piling on. The more pressure to get people to listen to science instead of Facebook, the better.

The endless references to 'science' are more reminiscent of Thomas Dolby than Louis Pasteur.

It would be refreshing to have data to support the various stances, hopefully correlated with a vanishingly small P value.

Enough of the papers I've come across indicate that the mRNA vaccines are both leaky and allow further spread of infection at a pace identical to that of the unvaccinated.  Hardly 'the most effective vaccines ever developed in human history.'

The hysteria surrounding the pandemic seems to be augmented by the Dunning Kruger effect, if anything.

 

BSBD,

Winsor

[winsor 236]

Nothing like moving the goalposts:

The prior CDC Definitions of Vaccine and Vaccination (August 26, 2021):

Vaccine: A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.

Vaccination: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.

The CDC Definitions of Vaccine and Vaccination since September 1, 2021:

Vaccine: A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.

Vaccine: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

19 minutes ago, winsor said:

Nothing like moving the goalposts:

The prior CDC Definitions of Vaccine and Vaccination (August 26, 2021):

Vaccine: A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.

Vaccination: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.

The CDC Definitions of Vaccine and Vaccination since September 1, 2021:

Vaccine: A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.

Vaccine: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease.

What was the definition from August 27th through August 31st?

 

And these definitions were changed because of the anti-vax crowd, because 'scientists" like yourself would scream: it is not making me immune, so it isn't a vaccine so nobody should get it.

[JoeWeber 2,743]

25 minutes ago, winsor said:

Nothing like moving the goalposts:

The prior CDC Definitions of Vaccine and Vaccination (August 26, 2021):

Vaccine: A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.

Vaccination: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.

The CDC Definitions of Vaccine and Vaccination since September 1, 2021:

Vaccine: A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.

Vaccine: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease.

Apparently, prior to the over the top, insane resistance to the vaccine and widespread forced study of how vaccines actually work no one previously noticed the imprecision in the description. So they fixed it. Good deal. 

[nwt 131]

25 minutes ago, winsor said:

Nothing like moving the goalposts:

The prior CDC Definitions of Vaccine and Vaccination (August 26, 2021):

Vaccine: A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.

Vaccination: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.

The CDC Definitions of Vaccine and Vaccination since September 1, 2021:

Vaccine: A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.

Vaccine: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease.

These two things both mean the same thing. Nothing moved. 

[brenthutch 444]

A funny take on NIH and COVID

[billvon 3,009]

1 hour ago, winsor said:

Nothing like moving the goalposts:

The prior CDC Definitions of Vaccine and Vaccination (August 26, 2021):

Vaccine: A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.

Vaccination: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.

The CDC Definitions of Vaccine and Vaccination since September 1, 2021:

Vaccine: A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.

Vaccine: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease.

Don't forget the 1796 definition:

Vaccine: A preparation of the Vaccinia virus (VACV or VV) derived from the variolae vaccinae virus, the virus that causes cowpox.  When injected, it causes an immune response that is protective against smallpox.

So the conspiracy to deceive everyone, and to move those goalposts for nefarious reasons, must have started sometime between 1796 and August 2021.

[winsor 236]

4 hours ago, billvon said:

Don't forget the 1796 definition:

Vaccine: A preparation of the Vaccinia virus (VACV or VV) derived from the variolae vaccinae virus, the virus that causes cowpox.  When injected, it causes an immune response that is protective against smallpox.

So the conspiracy to deceive everyone, and to move those goalposts for nefarious reasons, must have started sometime between 1796 and August 2021.

Woke - a disease of denial.  Shown here at its finest.

[kallend 2,032]

750,000

A very large fraction of those  completely preventable.

[lippy 918]

1 hour ago, winsor said:

Woke - a disease of denial.  Shown here at its finest.

We all know you're prone to rambling but now you've straight up gone and jumped threads!

[Westerly 61]

14 hours ago, winsor said:

The endless references to 'science' are more reminiscent of Thomas Dolby than Louis Pasteur.

It would be refreshing to have data to support the various stances, hopefully correlated with a vanishingly small P value.

Enough of the papers I've come across indicate that the mRNA vaccines are both leaky and allow further spread of infection at a pace identical to that of the unvaccinated.  Hardly 'the most effective vaccines ever developed in human history.'

The hysteria surrounding the pandemic seems to be augmented by the Dunning Kruger effect, if anything.

 

BSBD,

Winsor

Yea and are those ‘papers’ you’re reading postings on the comments section of Fox News? 

[base698 20]

19 hours ago, Westerly said:

They are more effective than predicted, a lot more effective. They were one of the most effective vaccines ever developed in human history actually. The problem is 45% of the entire US population is still unvaccinated and probably only 25% of the world population is vaccinated. That's kind of a problem when trying to get to herd immunity... If all this antivaxxer bullshit would cut the shit and get with the program, the virus would be extinct in the USA by now. I hope the vaccine mandates and restrictions for the unvaccinated keep piling on. The more pressure to get people to listen to science instead of Facebook, the better.

There are dozens of clips of Fauci claiming 97% percent effective and saying we'd have herd immunity by summer. 

How is 45% effective and constant boosters the most effective vaccine in the world?

Edited November 4, 2021 by base698

[billvon 3,009]

2 hours ago, base698 said:

There are dozens of clips of Fauci claiming 97% percent effective

That was Pfizer - not Fauci.  (And the Pfizer vaccine was 97% effective against the strains it was developed to protect against, not against strains that arose after it was developed.)

Here's what Fauci actually said in an interview in Dec 2020:

"Well, the answer is unless you get the overwhelming majority of the country vaccinated, and protected, and get that umbrella of what we call herd immunity, there's still a lot of virus out there.  So just because you're protected, so-called protected, by the vaccine, you should need to remember that you could be prevented from getting clinical disease, and still have the virus that is in your nasopharynx because you could get infected.  We're not sure, at this point, that the vaccine protects you against getting infected. We know for sure it's very, very good, 94 percent, 95 percent in protecting you against clinically recognizable disease, and almost a 100 percent in protecting you for severe disease."

Which was true in Dec 2020.

Quote

saying we'd have herd immunity by summer. 

June 2020, Fauci: "The best we've ever done is measles, which is 97 to 98 percent effective.  That would be wonderful if we get there. I don't think we will. I would settle for a 70, 75% effective vaccine."

He was asked if such a vaccine would get us to herd immunity if only 2/3 of the population took it.  "No.  Unlikely." he said.

Dec 2020, Fauci: "I would say 50% would have to get vaccinated before you start to see an impact.  But I would say 75 to 85% would have to get vaccinated if you want to have that blanket of herd immunity."  (Note - we are now at 58%) "Once we get there, if in the subsequent months, April, May, June, July, we get as many people vaccinated as possible, we could really turn this thing around before we get towards the end of the year."

Again, true.  And again, we didn't get to 75%.  We're not even at 60% yet due to the anti-vaxxers.

 

 

[Westerly 61]

Well hopefully the whip crack will become even harder and more vaccine mandates come into play to move us along. 

[base698 20]

9 hours ago, billvon said:

That was Pfizer - not Fauci.  (And the Pfizer vaccine was 97% effective against the strains it was developed to protect against, not against strains that arose after it was developed.)

Here's what Fauci actually said in an interview in Dec 2020:

"Well, the answer is unless you get the overwhelming majority of the country vaccinated, and protected, and get that umbrella of what we call herd immunity, there's still a lot of virus out there.  So just because you're protected, so-called protected, by the vaccine, you should need to remember that you could be prevented from getting clinical disease, and still have the virus that is in your nasopharynx because you could get infected.  We're not sure, at this point, that the vaccine protects you against getting infected. We know for sure it's very, very good, 94 percent, 95 percent in protecting you against clinically recognizable disease, and almost a 100 percent in protecting you for severe disease."

Which was true in Dec 2020.

June 2020, Fauci: "The best we've ever done is measles, which is 97 to 98 percent effective.  That would be wonderful if we get there. I don't think we will. I would settle for a 70, 75% effective vaccine."

He was asked if such a vaccine would get us to herd immunity if only 2/3 of the population took it.  "No.  Unlikely." he said.

Dec 2020, Fauci: "I would say 50% would have to get vaccinated before you start to see an impact.  But I would say 75 to 85% would have to get vaccinated if you want to have that blanket of herd immunity."  (Note - we are now at 58%) "Once we get there, if in the subsequent months, April, May, June, July, we get as many people vaccinated as possible, we could really turn this thing around before we get towards the end of the year."

Again, true.  And again, we didn't get to 75%.  We're not even at 60% yet due to the anti-vaxxers.

 

 

Ok. Here's dozens of headlines and clips of Fauci saying it would be 97% effective. https://mobile.twitter.com/joshfontanilla/status/1449184261811154949

Fact check using the claim he said it would be 100% effective against covid from March for comments on CNN in December https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-afs:Content:9996141232

Edited November 4, 2021 by base698

[olofscience 480]

8 minutes ago, base698 said:

Ok. Here's dozens of headlines and clips of Fauci saying it would be 97% effective. https://mobile.twitter.com/joshfontanilla/status/1449184261811154949

That's an outright lie - I watched the link and he said:

• "quite effective"
• "highly effective"
• "extraordinarily efficacious...94-95% for mild to moderate disease"

Nowhere in the clip did he say 97%. So not dozens of clips - zero clips. The rest of the video is just various media headlines. Now I need that 2 minutes of my life back...

Edited November 4, 2021 by olofscience

[base698 20]

4 minutes ago, olofscience said:

That's an outright lie - I watched the link and he said:

• "quite effective"
• "highly effective"
• "extraordinarily efficacious...94-95% for mild to moderate disease"

Nowhere in the clip did he say 97%. So not dozens of clips - zero clips. The rest of the video is just various media headlines.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/04/30/covid-vaccine-fauci-urges-americans-to-not-skip-second-shot.html

Here he says 94%.  Outright lie is strong language for a 3% difference.

Considering it's more like 40% at the end of the five month window. Anything in the 90s seem more like the lie.  

Edited November 4, 2021 by base698

[kallend 2,032]

1 minute ago, base698 said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/04/30/covid-vaccine-fauci-urges-americans-to-not-skip-second-shot.html

Here he says 94%.  Outright lie is strong language for a 3% difference.

Either it's true or it's not.  Since it wasn't true, it WAS a lie.

Easy, really.

[base698 20]

Just now, kallend said:

Either it's true or it's not.  Since it wasn't true, it WAS a lie.

Easy, really.

Only if you're uncharitable.  

[olofscience 480]

4 minutes ago, base698 said:

Outright lie is strong language for a 3% difference.

It is what it is. You didn't say "approximately" or "around", you said "97%". You also said he repeated it dozens of times - so you didn't just double down on your error, you multiplied it (at least) 12 times.

Edited November 4, 2021 by olofscience

[base698 20]

6 minutes ago, olofscience said:

It is what it is. You didn't say "approximately" or "around", you said "97%". You also said he repeated it dozens of times - so you didn't just double down on your error, you multiplied it (at least) 12 times.

Yeah because I'm not going to dig up every headline where he was quoted. I mispoke because I saw that clip a weeks ago when it first went viral.

My original question was around the idea someone could call any covid vaccine the most effective ever.  Almost every vaccine I'm aware of is better.  

The stated high effectiveness no booster littered the media on March and April.  Whether it was 90% or 99%.  That's much different than 40%-60%.  If you want to quibble over a mistake I made with 3% cool.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity

Des Pfizer have an incentive to get everyone to buy their product on a recurring plan?

Edited November 4, 2021 by base698

[winsor 236]

5 minutes ago, kallend said:

Either it's true or it's not.  Since it wasn't true, it WAS a lie.

Easy, really.

It's only a lie if you know the difference.

You have misinformed, the Holy Typo, differing definitions (what does '30% cleaner' mean, anyway), and outright cluelessness.

I'm sure there is a subset in which it is precisely "94% 'effective.'"

It's all how you look at it, actually.  The fact that it's bullshit is immaterial.

 

BSBD,

Winsor

[olofscience 480]

6 minutes ago, base698 said:

Almost every vaccine I'm aware of is better.

You're not aware of the flu vaccine? (about 40% effectiveness)

How about the BCG vaccine? (60-80% against severe disease, but still given to babies as standard)

Edited November 4, 2021 by olofscience