Coronavirus

2,059,861 Views | 19944 Replies | Last: 21 hrs ago by Werewolf
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Nothing to see here.

Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
(20) Africa United - Black Business on Twitter: "#SayNoToVaccineMandate 75 Fully vaccinated athletes "suddenly" died in only 5 months?? https://t.co/x4JKw5JAHp" / Twitter
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Google Search Trend for "Died Suddenly" Reaches All-Time High in Last Two Months (thegatewaypundit.com)

Google "DIED SUDDENLY"............it is working now......but expect it to be censored soon. Then utilize "DUCK DUCK GO" to search
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Gibraltar has 100% Covid Vaccination with 5th Highest Covid Mortality Rate in the World (linkedin.com)
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dear God DO NOT Get The Vaccines! COVID Shots Will "DECIMATE World Population" Warns Dr. Bhakdi (*****ute.com)
hokiewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This is a good thread on Twitter and worth the read

Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dr. Tenpenny & General Flynn Expose How Medical & Monetary Fraud Is Being Used to Destroy America (rumble.com)
Wayland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ACIP is reviewing the booster data. Pfizer's slide only shows data for between greater than 7 days and less than 2 months.

So, no ****, it is effective for 2 months. The original vaccine was effective for that long. What about at 6 months.
PackFansXL
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FDA Authorizes Pfizer and Moderna Boosters for Adults

Quote:

"The FDA has determined that the currently available data support expanding the eligibility of a single booster dose of the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines to individuals 18 years of age and older," Peter Marks, M.D., Ph.D., director of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research said. "Streamlining the eligibility criteria and making booster doses available to all individuals 18 years of age and older will also help to eliminate confusion about who may receive a booster dose and ensure booster doses are available to all who may need one."

Qualified people are eligible to receive the booster six months after their second shot of either the Pfizer or Modern vaccine was administered, the FDA confirmed. For those who received the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, the booster is available to them two months after the single dose.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PackFansXL said:

FDA Authorizes Pfizer and Moderna Boosters for Adults

Quote:

"The FDA has determined that the currently available data support expanding the eligibility of a single booster dose of the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines to individuals 18 years of age and older," Peter Marks, M.D., Ph.D., director of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research said. "Streamlining the eligibility criteria and making booster doses available to all individuals 18 years of age and older will also help to eliminate confusion about who may receive a booster dose and ensure booster doses are available to all who may need one."

Qualified people are eligible to receive the booster six months after their second shot of either the Pfizer or Modern vaccine was administered, the FDA confirmed. For those who received the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, the booster is available to them two months after the single dose.





Mormad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wayland said:

ACIP is reviewing the booster data. Pfizer's slide only shows data for between greater than 7 days and less than 2 months.

So, no ****, it is effective for 2 months. The original vaccine was effective for that long. What about at 6 months.


https://www.timesofisrael.com/pfizer-booster-shot-could-offer-protection-for-9-10-months-initial-data/

Who knows? Only time will tell. But this makes sense based on what I've read.

How do they define "effective?" Effective at what? Did they say?
Wayland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mormad said:

Wayland said:

ACIP is reviewing the booster data. Pfizer's slide only shows data for between greater than 7 days and less than 2 months.

So, no ****, it is effective for 2 months. The original vaccine was effective for that long. What about at 6 months.


https://www.timesofisrael.com/pfizer-booster-shot-could-offer-protection-for-9-10-months-initial-data/

Who knows? Only time will tell. But this makes sense based on what I've read.

How do they define "effective?" Effective at what? Did they say?
I believe it was symptomatic infection, but now don't recall.

If this is the silver bullet, that is great.

But again, I am old enough to remember when the original series was 100% effective, so I am happy to wait a year.
PackFansXL
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mormad said:

Wayland said:

ACIP is reviewing the booster data. Pfizer's slide only shows data for between greater than 7 days and less than 2 months.

So, no ****, it is effective for 2 months. The original vaccine was effective for that long. What about at 6 months.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/pfizer-booster-shot-could-offer-protection-for-9-10-months-initial-data/

Who knows? Only time will tell. But this makes sense based on what I've read.
How do they define "effective?" Effective at what? Did they say?
The article doesn't explain the prediction of effectiveness for 9 months but I assume they are testing Abs levels multiple times and projecting the decline rate will match some threshold after that period. Do you know if that is how this is done?
Mormad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PackFansXL said:

Mormad said:

Wayland said:

ACIP is reviewing the booster data. Pfizer's slide only shows data for between greater than 7 days and less than 2 months.

So, no ****, it is effective for 2 months. The original vaccine was effective for that long. What about at 6 months.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/pfizer-booster-shot-could-offer-protection-for-9-10-months-initial-data/

Who knows? Only time will tell. But this makes sense based on what I've read.
How do they define "effective?" Effective at what? Did they say?
The article doesn't explain the prediction of effectiveness for 9 months but I assume they are testing Abs levels multiple times and projecting the decline rate will match some threshold after that period. Do you know if that is how this is done?


I don't know. I hope I'll get an email with the study when available. Important info. I posted a meta-analysis on the previous page that offers some insight. The vax seems to give at least 6 months Ab protection, the Ab half life appears to be 108 d, and the boosters seem to create even more robust Ab production so the Israeli numbers seem reasonable.
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doctor Hovis on Hospital Mandate / American Freedom (rumble.com)

Spartanburg Regional
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.facebook.com/messenger_media/?thread_id=4144749042229993&attachment_id=612232993535404&message_id=mid.%24gAA65oJZYYumDbGc0xl9OyF5dT4k6
Mormad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj-2021-068302

Really easy to read meta-analysis on the effectiveness of non-pharm mitigation on covid R, incidence, and mortality. Lots of limitations of such a study, which they do a good job pointing out limitations and biases. The best part of the study is quick, easy access to all the studies they link if one were ever interested.
Wayland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mormad said:

https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj-2021-068302

Really easy to read meta-analysis on the effectiveness of non-pharm mitigation on covid R, incidence, and mortality. Lots of limitations of such a study, which they do a good job pointing out limitations and biases. The best part of the study is quick, easy access to all the studies they link if one were ever interested.


Meta analysis of bad studies still give bad output. I believe this is the one that comes to the conclusion of a 53% reduction from hand washing and a 53% reduction from masking.

Should be a red flag. This made the rounds recently to a lot of eye rolls. If I am near a computer and come across some takedown of this, I will post.

Admit, I didn't read this one in depth after seeing the hand wsshing.
Mormad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ok
Wayland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mormad
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://americanpeopledaily.com/new-york-mayor-resorts-to-bribery-to-get-kids-to-vaccinate/

It's not about a virus...
#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
statefan91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wayland said:


Won't vax rates greatly reduce the impact from a hospitalizations and death standpoint, i.e., de-fanging the virus like Davie and Mormad have talked about? It seems like cases are here to stay and are seasonal like you've mentioned.
Wayland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
statefan91 said:

Wayland said:


Won't vax rates greatly reduce the impact from a hospitalizations and death standpoint, i.e., de-fanging the virus like Davie and Mormad have talked about? It seems like cases are here to stay and are seasonal like you've mentioned.
That is the hope and what we should see.

But the number one metric the CDC and local authorities look at is cases.
statefan91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Got it - yeah seems like cases need to not be looked at as vax rates + therapeutics get approval. There are going to be cases, and it's impossible to tell who is / isn't testing and why. Need to focus on hospitalizations / death / ensuring access to vaccine + therapeutics in my amateur opinion.
Mormad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
statefan91 said:

Got it - yeah seems like cases need to not be looked at as vax rates + therapeutics get approval. There are going to be cases, and it's impossible to tell who is / isn't testing and why. Need to focus on hospitalizations / death / ensuring access to vaccine + therapeutics in my amateur opinion.


I agree with you. The tweet has a little false logic as we all know. One can't look solely at case rates and suggest conclusions about the effectiveness or role of vaccines/PPE without further info. So i looked at the states he lists.

Cases are indeed here to stay, but every state reported increased testing, a 5-7% pos rate, anywhere from 80%(NY) to 88-95%(everybody else) of cases being among the unvaxxed, a 1-2% pos rate among the vaxxed, 0.03% hosp rate and 0.013% death rate among the vaxxed, and 90% of hospitalizations and 95% of reported deaths being unvaxxed.
I can post specific numbers for each state if anybody is interested.

Even with waning humoral immunity, these numbers suggest the vaxxes still appear to reduce your risk of not only hospitalization and death, but also contracting (symptomatic) disease. (Who knows how many people have mild or no sxs and don't get tested). That shouldn't be that surprising given that's how circulating Abs and memory cells work. Obviously, the effectiveness of the vaccines in preventing disease and transmission decays over time as we now know, but during the time of high humoral immunity after infection/immunization those Abs (in the immunocompetent) should bind and kill virus to reduce risk of viral loads that cause disease and transmission to some degree.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cases matter until democrats stop using them to justify their ridiculous ineffective mandates.
Mormad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:

Cases matter until democrats stop using them to justify their ridiculous ineffective mandates.


Absolutely 100% agree with that, grad.
Wayland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Here are some NC case numbers before data gets crazy with holidays.





It looks like Eastern NC counties cases haven't bounced quite as high yet. Will be interesting to watch going forward.

Will also be interesting to watch hospital numbers. (and the weekly flu report)
Daviewolf83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I just replied to the latest scary holiday tweet from WRAL about cases rising for the past nine days and reaching the highest number since October 29 with the following (I included the graph you see below):

"Daily hospital admissions for this same period are trending flat (7-day avg). Since we now have vaccines effective at preventing serious illness, hospitalization, and death for all known variants, not all cases are equal. Focus should be on hospitalizations and not cases."

Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
three world renowned experts risk livelihood and personal safety

If you've not been vaccinated, please take the time to listen to these three global experts discussing this topic. It may save your life.

If you've been vaccinated, please - please - listen from the 1:36 to the 1:48 mark.
#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
Wayland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Daviewolf83 said:

I just replied to the latest scary holiday tweet from WRAL about cases rising for the past nine days and reaching the highest number since October 29 with the following (I included the graph you see below):

"Daily hospital admissions for this same period are trending flat (7-day avg). Since we now have vaccines effective at preventing serious illness, hospitalization, and death for all known variants, not all cases are equal. Focus should be on hospitalizations and not cases."


I like that you did admissions here, since I think there is an unknown floor to hospitalizations for the 'long term' patients that don't cycle quite the same. Still wish we had a better FOR/WITH designation.

Hopefully we can keep those numbers down for the next month or so until the main part of the winter wave rolls through.



EDIT: Ideally if there is a wave, it plays out more like the spring 2021 wave as opposed to last winter or summer 2021. Ideally, ideally, things fizzle out completely.....
Wayland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wayland said:

Daviewolf83 said:

I just replied to the latest scary holiday tweet from WRAL about cases rising for the past nine days and reaching the highest number since October 29 with the following (I included the graph you see below):

"Daily hospital admissions for this same period are trending flat (7-day avg). Since we now have vaccines effective at preventing serious illness, hospitalization, and death for all known variants, not all cases are equal. Focus should be on hospitalizations and not cases."


I like that you did admissions here, since I think there is an unknown floor to hospitalizations for the 'long term' patients that don't cycle quite the same. Still wish we had a better FOR/WITH designation.

Hopefully we can keep those numbers down for the next month or so until the main part of the winter wave rolls through.


Will see how much the orange line starts to pull up to follow cases as backlog comes in.

Mormad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I can confirm there are plenty of WITH numbers
First Page Last Page
Page 412 of 570
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.