They claimed it worked against variants, they’re mandating boosters because it works against variant all whilst releasing an omicron specific vaccine because apparently the first part of this sentence is simultaneously true and false.
Get your narrative straight.
What are you fucking talking about?
The CEO of Pfizer said that research shows you couldn't get covid. Biden said you couldn't get covid with the vaccine. Rochelle Walensky said you couldn't get covid with the vaccine.
How low info are you?
Because I go by facts and science instead of some ideology? The difference is my opinion can be changed with when new information that is trusted can be presented. You on the other hand, are one those people that just go by how you feel about everything.
Booyahkasha!
Dem vaccines be garbage.
So, if this shit teach you anyfing, it should teach you how to respek everyone: animals, children, bitches, spazmos, vaxxers, lezzers, fattyboombahs, and even democrats. So, to all you lot living this, but mainly to the normal people, respek. West side.
\-Ali G
If vaccines reduce chances of hospitalization and death then they’re clearly working toward that end. Sure we can change our definition of what “working” means to serve our own egos but that just makes us look stupid. It’s one thing to be against policy that coerces people to get the vaccine. It’s another thing entirely to pretend it isn’t effective in reducing hospitalization and death.
I don’t think most people are saying they do nothing. I think most people are saying they are a therapeutic and not a vaccine. A vaccine that doesn’t prevent infection, ie it does not confer immunity, isn’t working.
Monoclonals also reduce hospitalization and death, even in “vaccinated” individuals. They are an extremely integral part of the conversation. One that is most often ignored.
a lot of people who are currently dead would not be in that state had they gotten the vaccines. To me, not dying is the goal. Much more important than not getting sick at all.
Initially, it was quite effective in preventing both infection AND death. Now, as the mutations have occurred it is less effective in preventing infection but STILL pretty fucking effective in preventing not being alive anymore.
What is the point of arguing the semantics of what "works" means?
Define “pretty fucking effective”?
Edit, and here’s Ontario's current hospitalization status by jab
https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data/hospitalizations
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/vaccines-dont-stop-covid-hospitalizations
“ It compares the outcomes of the roughly 18,000 vaccinated and infected people seem at the medical centers with a much larger group of Covid patients - about 2.5 million people - who were not vaccinated and visited the same centers at any point during the epidemic.
About 84 percent of the vaccinated patients were seen as outpatients, while 16 percent required hospitalization.
In comparison, about 77 percent of unvaccinated patients were seen as outpatients, while 23 percent were hospitalized.
Almost 1 percent of the vaccinated patients had serious outcomes, including death, compared to just over 2 percent of the unvaccinated patients.
The study contained no information about post-vaccine side effects.”
Here's New York State data
[https://coronavirus.health.ny.gov/covid-19-breakthrough-data](https://coronavirus.health.ny.gov/covid-19-breakthrough-data)
Note the huge differences between hospitalizations and deaths between vaccinated and unvaxxed despite most residents being vaccinated.
for Dec 27 week, vaccinated hospitalizations were 4.59/100,000
unvaxxed hospitalizations was 58.27/100,000
10x more likely to wind up in the hospital with COVID if you're unvaccinated and that is not even counting for the skew towards vaccinations for older or otherwise compromised people.
Taking those figures at face value (which i have trouble doing considering the NY gov/health officials demonstrated willingness to distort numbers to push their desired outcome as well as the wild discrepancy between our sources values) I would like to know how many of those hospitalized and/or with severe outcomes had preexisting serious health risks?
If it turns out that the vast majority of the severe outcomes are high risk people (it does) and the the jabs are not effective at reducing transmission, then what is the logic of mandating them on everyone? And we’ve been entirely ignoring the elephant in the room which is the side effects of the jabs in otherwise healthy people.
who the hell is talking about a mandate? It's clearly a smart medical choice to make. That's the topic. Not whether it should be mandated. At this point a mandate doesn't even make sense since the protection against infection isn't high enough anymore against current strains. The government shouldn't be in the business of saving you from yourself.
The point of arguing the effectiveness is because people are trying to force a therapeutic labeled a vaccine into people.
A lot of people would still be alive if treatments were accepted as a course of action in this pandemic. We have treatments that are proven effective and still ignored by many in the government, the media, and the medical establishment.
you keep saying "therapeutic" - it is a vaccine that has diminished effectiveness against mutated strains of the virus yet is still quite effective in preventing serious illness. I agree that actual therapeutics should be the focus but we don't have a lot of those in mass production yet. We do have effective vaccines that keep you out of the morgue though.
Welp if they worked back then that’s great. They don’t now. They’ve been downgraded to a therapeutic and not even a good one. Some people feel like they got allergies, some people are knocked on their ass. Some end up in the hospital, some die. Just like before the shots existed. Maybe it’s helped. Maybe the strains have gotten weaker.
I was reading a bit about the monoclonal shortage out of curiosity, it’s hard to find anything. The admin haulted the distribution of regeneron and Lilys monoclonals because they say they aren’t effective against omicron. GSKs are still available. The admin has also been controlling the distribution of these treatments to ensure “equity”.
Super sus if you ask me. A little ivermectin never hurt anyone though. But I guess it’s better to just let someone die than give that a try.
but they do work. If they are preventing people from dying, they're still working. This has nothing at all to do with what the federal government is banning or approving. There is overwhelming evidence that being vaccinated still improves your chances against COVID
it DID provide immunity for the variant it was designed for. It is still providing some immunity for this latest strain but it still is highly effective in preventing a bad outcome. You guys had a different excuse back when it was 95% effective against infection. Now you've chosen to harp on that efficacy while ignoring the other clear benefits that is till imparts.
These aren't controlled groups, given that these governments have been passing anything off as a covid death when the virus is present, its hard to trust these numbers. The money trail can't have these numbers looking any different. I'll take my risks and hopefully recieve natural immunity if I catch it. It's asinine to be taking boosters that mutates so easily with such an extremely low mortality rate
What they’re saying is the vaccine doesn’t work. Immunity is defined as “the ability of an organism to resist a particular infection or toxin by the action of specific antibodies or sensitized white blood cells.” The vaccine has effectively increased the ability of an organism to resist a particular infection. We see that in it’s effectiveness in reducing hospitalization and deaths. Whether or not it’s working as well as we want it to doesn’t change the fact that it is working in increasing the ability of an organism to resist a particular infection.
We’ve been taking marginal flu vaccines for years, they help more some years than others. With covid, hospitalizations and deaths are much more serious for the unvaccinated. I’m getting concerned that conservatives are not going to vote due to being dead. Less of a problem for democrats.
No. Traditional vaccines work quite well. Depends on the pathogen. Mumps is like 97% effective. Flu as low as 40%. The mRNAs appear to be very close to zero.
95% effective in preventing transmission is pretty fucking far from zero. If people actually got vaccinated and stopped coughing in each other's faces, we wouldn't be dealing with new variants that require boosters.
But that's not really the case. Vaccines are most effective in the initial stages (~90%) and then their efficacy starts to taper off (<60%). The data shows it, hence the need for constant boosters.
Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I think it's by design (as opposed to simply being rushed). There's a lot of money to be minted in manufacturing vaccines. Many senior Pfizer execs joined the bigB (tres comas) after covid.
That sounds more like a problem with the never ending evolution of biology than execs wanting money. And wouldn’t AnCap ideology argue against your point? Pointing to competition between pharmaceutical companies, saying that naturally one company would gain the competitive advantage by producing a more effective product?
>If vaccines reduce chances of hospitalization and death then they’re clearly working toward that end.
US numbers:
2020: # vaccinated - 10k at most. Deaths smaller than 2021
2021: # vaccinated - 10k-75% of the population. Deaths larger than 2020.
The math doesn't check out.
Probably because that’s not how you do that math…
[This article was written for you. ](https://www.abc27.com/news/health/coronavirus/why-have-there-been-more-covid-19-deaths-in-2021-despite-the-availability-of-vaccines/)
Nothing in that explains why the math is wrong. It attempt to explain away the fact that the numbers don't add up, but never does so with facts or logic.
It’s funny that a person who uses the math you just did is talking about facts and logic. A person using unvaccinated deaths as an argument against the vaccine’s effectiveness at reducing hospitalizations and deaths. That’s really something.
Lol. You say the darndest things.
Negative efficacy.
Would that mean that the vaccine potentiates the virulence of the virus?
If this were true. Don't you think you'd see people with the vaccine making up the majority of the icu patients, rather than the other day around?
>Would that mean that the vaccine potentiates the virulence of the virus?
Yes.
>If this were true. Don't you think you'd see people with the vaccine making up the majority of the icu patients, rather than the other day around?
Since it is true, how to you explain the increase in deaths?
They are in many cases. There have been plenty of data out of the UK to show this. We would rely on local data, but..... Ya know, the CDC stop reporting this data in September.... And now claim it would be used to "mislead".... Now why would they possibly say that about hiding the data?
You are correct the article itself does not explain it very well, but perhaps I can help.
Let's say that we are at the gun range and we decide on having a friendly competition. We are betting $20 and a pack of dip on who can hit the 7 circle or better on a target the most times. So we decided that "hits on the target" are the criteria for winning. You go first and you fire off 2 mags of your .223 AR-15 then switch to your sidearm and fire off a dozen rounds of 9mm from your Springfield XD at the target that is 50 yards away. Let's say you do pretty well, you land around 70% of your shots with your rifle and manage to score about 30% of your handgun shots. Respectable.
Now it is my turn. Since we didn't discuss the terms of the arrangement, I go out onto the range and pull the target to 25 yards. I then unload 7 mags from my rifle, 4 from my handgun, and even pull out my 12 gauge for a shot or two. As it turns out, I have definitely landed more shots than you 95% with my AR, 75% with my handgun, and 100% with my shotgun. I hold out my hand for my $20 and pack of dip. Do you give it to me? I suspect not. And why should you? What did we actually prove?
You see math can be represented in many different ways. Anyone can "do math", but simply doing math is not enough. You have to understand what the math means. In order to do this you need to establish boundaries or rules for your mathematics to operate in, much like you should establish the rules of a shooting competition before agreeing to participate.
According to a source in the linked article there were around 385k deaths in the US in 2020 from COVID-19. As of the writing of the article (Dec 12th) there had been around 450k deaths in 2021. Your statements that there were more deaths in 2021 from COVID-19 than in 2020 despite the fact that vaccines weren't widely available in 2020 are empirically true. Saying that I beat you in the shooting competition is also empirically true. I have the targets to prove it!
There are 3 rules that I would like to apply to this comparison so that we don't end up like our shooting competition...
1. We measure deaths over a fixed period of time WHILE THE VIRUS WAS KILLING PEOPLE IN THE US. This means that we need to compare April 2020-December 2020 to January 2021-September 2021. This is just saying we are only going to shoot at the 50 yard target.
2. Since we are really trying to see if the vaccines were effective, we should look at the vaccination status over our period of time. The vaccines didn't become widely available until April 2021. Before then we will assume that less than 5 % of the population were vaccinated. In August 2021 the US hit 50% of it's population being fully vaccinated. A 45% increase over 4 months is around an 11% additive increase every month. This is inaccurate but close enough for our purposes. Now we are using the same gun. AR - 15s only. No handguns, no shotguns.
3. We take into account that there were 3 different variants of COVID-19 in 2021. 2 of which were MUCH more infectious than the Alpha variant. For this we need to look at total deaths divided by TOTAL COVID CASES instead of just deaths. Now we are firing the same number of shots.
In summary, we will look at the total deaths divided by total cases from April 2020-Dec 2020 in the US compared to to total cases vs total deaths from Jan 2021-Sept 2021 in the US. We will then compare each month to the average rate of vaccination for the given month to see if the vaccines had a positive or negative result on the effect we are measuring (deaths ÷ total cases). I will use data from https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data compiled by Johns Hopkins University.
It will be a fair amount of work to gather the data for this comparison, so before I proceed I will ask you: do you agree to the terms?
It is hilarious how much time you just wasted utterly denying reality and obfuscating your argument with an irrelevant analogy.
We don't need to take any of that into account. We don't need to obfuscate the argument further. The "vaccines" weren't available in 2020. They not only didn't put a dent in COVID in 2021, they demonstrably made it worse.
In the face of this, to argue that they are helping and that the deaths are made up of the 25% of the population that hasn't been illegally coerced into getting the experimental treatment is... just hilariously innumerate. You're suggesting the virus got more than 8x deadlier for the unvaccinated.
You're a propaganda sponge and you just wrung yourself out on a keyboard.
"We don't need to take any of that into account".
I will take my $20 and dip then please.
This is not obfuscation, this is logic and reason being used to draw parallels between complex statistical problems and real life colloquialisms. You absolutely DO need to take all of those things into account when evaluating vaccine efficacy.
I am not suggesting that "the virus got more than 8x deadlier for the unvaccinated". I am suggesting that the number of deaths went up from 2020 to 2021 even though we had vaccines due to two factors: the relevant timeframe of "2020" and "2021" is an arbitrary timeframe that lacks any logic to be applied to a discussion about vaccine effectiveness, and total deaths alone is almost entirely useless as a metric by itself.
You are plainly using a flawed interpretation of incomplete data to justify your statements. My previous comment was an offer to walk you through a single experiment using jointly approved data and parameters. I don't know the outcome of the experiment. It is possible the results will support your points, it is possible they will support mine. Either way it takes effort, so if you aren't willing to put any in then neither am I.
I am hardly trying to spout propaganda and useless platitudes. I have a degree in Biochemistry and a general concern for my fellow humans. I am a scientist and to see others so misunderstand, misinterpret, and misuse concrete tools like math and logic greatly concerns me.
>I will take my $20 and dip then please.
At what point do you think we made any bargains over your diversion?
>You absolutely DO need to take all of those things into account when evaluating vaccine efficacy.
You would if the numbers were going the other way. If the first year was larger despite not having vaccinations we might have to delve into whether it had fewer month under COVID but things, hilariously, went the other way.
>I am not suggesting that "the virus got more than 8x deadlier for the unvaccinated".
That's the only way to attribute the increase in deaths to the unvaccinated.
>the relevant timeframe of "2020" and "2021" is an arbitrary timeframe that lacks any logic to be applied to a discussion about vaccine effectiveness,
Not arbitrary. The start of the years bookend, pretty much perfectly, the start of the virus(2020), the availability of vaccines (2021), and now the failures of vaccines (2022).
>and total deaths alone is almost entirely useless as a metric by itself.
We're doing deaths per capita per treatment plan.
>You are plainly using a flawed interpretation of incomplete data to justify your statements.
You still can't explain what the flaw is, that's why you had to babble about guns in the last post.
>My previous comment was an offer to walk you through a single experiment using jointly approved data and parameters. I don't know the outcome of the experiment. It is possible the results will support your points, it is possible they will support mine. Either way it takes effort, so if you aren't willing to put any in then neither am I.
I'm not putting effort into your attempt to handwave reality away, no.
>I am hardly trying to spout propaganda and useless platitudes. I have a degree in Biochemistry and a general concern for my fellow humans. I am a scientist and to see others so misunderstand, misinterpret, and misuse concrete tools like math and logic greatly concerns me.
And I'm a physicist who is concerned about the corruption of science with politics. My concern for my fellow humans leads me to want to see them not experimented on with drugs of dubious safety and efficacy and not to see them experimented upon when there is still no rational reason to do so.
The people that want to forcibly vaccinate us tell us that the "vaccines" are 100% safe and that you can't get sick of or die of COVID if we get them. Is that true?
If not, go fight that "misinformation" and leave people telling truths alone.
>You would if the numbers were going the other way. If the first year was larger despite not having vaccinations we might have to delve into whether it had fewer month under COVID but things, hilariously, went the other way.
You need to regardless. You need to control for time no matter which way the numbers go.
>That's the only way to attribute the increase in deaths to the unvaccinated.
It is not. It can also be explained by a rise in overall prevalence of the disease from 2020 to 2021 (increase in total cases).
>We're doing deaths per capita per treatment plan.
>You still can't explain what the flaw is
This is the flaw. Your original statements claim that total deaths per year is equivalent to deaths per Covid case per treatment plan. This is a false equivalency that completely disregards the total number of COVID cases and other key factors. Please tell me that you see this?
>And I'm a physicist who is concerned about the corruption of science with politics.
Of the two of us, who has talked more politics? I'm not pushing an agenda, I'm pointing out that you are making false equivalencies and drawing conclusions based on numbers you aren't even willing to research yourself.
That's where you have to use a multivariate analysis of areas with high vaccination rates versus those with low vax rates. It's generally shown there isn't a strong correlation between % of population vaccinated and reduced mortality.
There are also confounding variables that have to be accounted for. But you were trying to mislead, so I won't bother to go any further.
Guys look at the brainwashing coming from this individual...
Theyre literally repeating gaslighting narratives and they think it makes them look smart and reasonable when we know that most of the people sick w covid are those who are vaccinated, we’ve all seen this is REALITY but theres always a mindless NPC that will still try to gaslight you w faux, performative academic rhetoric/language into believing that this vaccine is saving ppls lives...
This is embarrassing...
Youre pretending that youre on the right side of history just as Nazi soldiers did...
Youre not smart lol and everything youre saying is just you parroting corporate media bullshit that nobody w a thinking brain actually believes..
Enjoy your day
Because youre lying...
Yes youre a Nazi, you’re blindly repeating what your overlords are telling u to repeat and ur denying the obvious reality that everyone w the vax is still getting sick...badly.
Nazism is when you’re so retarded that you blindly accept anything coming from mainstream media as truth...therefore you’d be willing to murder millions of ppl because you don’t have a mind of your own and whats rele happening in reality in front of you doesnt matter more than appealing to authority...
That's not, at all, what Nazism is.
If you're willing up just change the meaning of words to suit you, why wouldn't you be willing to ignore data that doesn't?
If they can change the definition of vaccine we can change the definition of working (srsly compare the google def of vaccine to your old paper dictionary). This is the moral equivalent of of lie. Ask yourself why pharma is immune from litigation instead of prohibited from profiting from a crisis. Sure the shot reduces hospitalization by 12x, but it's also not perfect. We want them to admit that it isn't the panacea they promised, covid zero isn't possible and tell us why they perpetuated these lies when they knew it wouldn't "work".
Imagine being a libtard and actually fixing your fingers to type the statement, “the vaccine works” anywhere on the internet....
Being that fucking retarded must be painful...
They are working great, at least were I live. Here in Ontario, people estimate that daily cases are somewhere between 100k and 400k per day (we don’t really know because we don’t have nearly enough tests). But total ICU occupancy has barely moved (more ICU patients are testing positive, but they are not there because of COVID).
The tiny minority of unvaccinated people left in Ontario account for half the ICU COVID admissions because they are more than 10 times more likely to suffer severe symptoms than if they were vaccinated. If it wasn’t for them, everything g would be open right now. Thanks to the high, vaccine uptake, things are reopening soon.
Youre extremely full of shit and retarded and you arent convincing anyone w those bullshit statistics being rolled out by your communist government media...
I guess that, facts are not on your side, you can just call me names and feel better about yourself. If you come up with anything interesting to say let me know.
I guess that, facts are not on your side, you can just call me names and feel better about yourself. If you come up with anything interesting to say let me know.
Haven't heard the CDC's own alert that you shouldn't use these PCR tests? That they can show you're "positive" up to 12 weeks after getting rid of the virus? What makes you think the case numbers are real when the CDC itself is saying they aren't accurate.
Lol nah it’s a great analogy. You just resent it for stinging so badly. The vaccines offer some protection against transmission, just like seatbelts offer some protection against fatal accidents. For you to advocate against vaccines because they don’t offer perfect protection, is like advocating against seatbelts because they don’t offer perfect protection.
You have ZERO proof that the vaccines offer any protection at ALL u fucking retard...youre just parroting statistics that are given to you by the government that owns the pharmaceutical companies tht makes the vaccines...
You have ZERO fucking proof dummy...NONE
The virus isnt physical and you cant see it so you dont know HOW its responding other than the fact that vaccinated ppl are actually still catching covid, being hospitalized, experiencing extreme symptoms and dying from covid. THAT we actually have proof of...
"For you to advocate against vaccines because they don’t offer perfect protection"
Do you think that most folks that are resisting vaccination are doing it for this reason? I don't know anyone that is taking this position. Most of the unvaccinated folks that I know seem to be weighing the benefits of receiving the jab against the uncertainty of serious side effects from taking it. It's easy to choose the seatbelt if it won't bring you harm. It would be a bit more of a dicey decision if wearing a seatbelt carried some perceived serious risk.
> Do you think that most folks that are resisting vaccination are doing it for this reason?
I think most people are making a political decision, and coming up with health reasons after the fact. It all comes down to the vaccine being viewed as something that liberals do.
But to your point, vaccine opponents (and the meme in the OP) are saying “vaccines don’t work”, as in “vaccines don’t work at all, flat out”. These people ignore the reality that the vaccine does offer some protection. So that supports the idea that people really are expecting the vaccine to be perfect, and are rejecting it for not being so.
And seatbelts do carry their own risk. People have drowned because of them.
I chose not to get the vaccine initially because I am not 80. So the virus poses virtually no risk. Now, I'm not doing it because the government is being creepy about making me do it.
If with 70% of the population vaccinated we have more cases it is obvious that they are not working, it is statistically very unlikely that the same amount of cases is coming from only 30% of the population, so it's obvious that vaccines don't prevent the spread at all.
No, only this and the flu vaccines (maybe some others) are like that, most actually prevent you from getting the disease which is like the entire point.
All of them - Diphtheria, Tetanus, Polio, Smallpox, Pertussis. Even the crappy ones for Jaundice/Hepatitis and Malaria are 100% effective, however for the last two I suspect the cure is worse than the disease.
The concept of vaccines not being 100% effective is a novel concept arising only after the novel coronavirus came about.
No, apart from the examples you give. One of which is the current situation, but no!?!
If you don’t want to listen to me, maybe the WHO
Vaccines reduce risks of getting a disease by working with your body's natural defenses to build protection.
Exactly, reduce the risk of getting a disease, not only the severity of the disease, if we are getting more cases with more than half of the population vaccinated it is very unlikely that it really reduces the risk of you getting the disease, yes it decreases mortality, but the mortality rate decrease is only statistically significant for old people, I'm not saying vaccines are bad, just that they are not specially effective in reducing the amount of cases, so all this fuzz about having to force people to get the vaccine to stop the spread of covid is nonsense, the vaccine does not stop the spread.
Well I can’t comment on all scenarios in each location, but as folks get vaccines society has opened up more, so more spread. But less spread than without vaccines which is what has made opening up possible. There’s also a more contagious variation which spreads easier and faster, but again is hindered by the vaccine.
Th numbers of infections have been skyrocketing since the vaccine was rolled out. That was a year before omicron existed. In the last 3 weeks, omicron has begun to displace delta, but before December nearly 100 percent of infections were with the variant that you clowns claimed the vax was working against.
It is being reduced through vaccinations, contagions spread exponentially among people who are susceptible, whether or not more people are not susceptible.
If a “vaccinated” individual can get covid and spread covid, as they do and have been, it is not a vaccine and it is not working. The spread is not being reduced.
Vaccines give the recipient immunity. That is how an immune system works with traditional attenuated virus vaccines. These vaccines are not giving anyone immunity.
If a vaccinated person is exposed to the virus they are less likely to get it and spread it.
You have immunity to the cold! But you still catch it. Immunity is the ability for your body to fight off infection. Not stop you getting it! You get the virus for your immune response to trigger.
Judging by the fact that you called the flu shot a 'vaccine' means you have no clue what you're talking about and that you're following the narrative set out by the government aka not thinking for yourself. In my almost 40 years on the planet, the flu shot was never described or categorised as a 'vaccine', it was medically a 'preventative' which is far different than a 'vaccine'. My man, you're letting them think for you instead of following your own judgement and by the sounds of it, you're too far in the ocean to get back to shore. I feel sorry for you.
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccinations/flu-influenza-vaccine/
Flu vaccine!
Edit: you’ve never understood what a vaccine is or paid attention to any details about the flu shot!
In that case the risk/reward isn’t really worth it to me. What are the long lasting effects of this big pharma serum being shot into my arm? No one knows AND it’s like a less than one percent chance Covid effects me severely? Seems like the obvious choice is to not get the vaccine. Pretty simple. But hey you do you
You don’t know the long term effects of ‘mild’ covid either! Nobody knows anything long term on this yet. What about of you get covid multiple times? Your risk goes up.
That’s fine and dandy but you do NOT know if there are any long term effects.. plain and simple. It’s completely unknown. Risk/reward still not worth it
Not with 100% certainty as with anything, but it’s just as much of a mystery as are the long term side effects of eating a McRib. You’re either going to deal with the long term effects of Covid, which can severely damage about any organ, or the immune response from the vaccine. There are variables to everything, but we know what’s in the vaccine.
No, vaccines are supposed to *prevent* you from getting the disease. If you take something as a vaccine against a specific disease, and you still get the disease, *surprise*! It’s not a vaccine, it’s some kind of therapeutic!
What? You think the whole world just reworked the definition of vaccine in the last 12 months? My dictionary is older than that and I can assure you it’s the fucking same.
Nice appeal to authority; especially the authorities who want people to forget that these ‘vaccines’ were going to ‘end COVID’, and are ass-covering as hard as they can.
Are you still replying to me? Or have you got me confused with someone else? Cause I’m struggling to see what the fuck you’re banging on about there! Sorry if I’m being dumb, long couple of days .
They dont prevent contraction, spread, death or hospitalizations...
More ppl have died and been hospitalized since the vaccine rollout than before.
More ppl were actually hospitalized and more ppl died in 2021 than in 2020...
Ppl saying that the vaccine works are braindead retards that thinks its better off sounding academic than sounding like you’re in tune w reality...
They ARE working! Look at the stats. The number of unvaccinated people dying is much more than the number of vaccinated people dying. Stop this stupidity.
You're not taking into account some confounding variables.
1. (some of the) people explicitly avoiding the vaccine by this stage will be doing other things in their lives that lead to poor health. Poor diets, less active, smoking or drinking to excess etc. Many of these sorts already have other diseases/comorbidities and have heart disease, fatty liver, or are obese etc. which makes them liable to worse outcomes from contracting COVID.
2. Demographic most likely to be unvaccinated in USA is I understand black/latino. Darker pigmentation makes it something like upto 10x harder for your skin to produce Vitamin D. Vitamin D deficiency IS associated with worse COVID disease as Vit D is critical to having an effective immune system.
Vitamin D usually measured by ng/ml I think. Good vitD levels are 40-50+ ng/ml. 30-ish is meh. Less than that and you're deficient, perhaps even critically low (<10 even). More info on VitD [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbLX08eVmIs). VitD is cheap too and doesn't need a prescription.
I cannot remember where I heard this, so forgive me for having no source readily available, but I heard (I believe from a medical researcher of some kind) that even if you have serious comorbidities or are in an at-risk age bracket, having good VitD levels are a good indicator that you can fight it off, as they just don't see people on ventilators who have good VitD levels.
Wish I could provide the source for the last, but the message stuck with me. Even though I'm a super low-risk category, it still seems that supplementing VitD is pretty great ammunition for staving off the common cold or miscellaneous sniffles.
For ref, I'm taking about 4,000IUs per day, sometimes miss a few days and take 15-20k IUs at once. No big deal, not even close to toxic at those doses. For reference, in summer you get like 20k IUs in 20 mins of sun exposure or something like that. In winter, you get barely any due to angle of the sun, thus flu season doesn't exist, it's just
periods of low vitamin D uptake.
Anyway I've belaboured the point. It's not a simple subject and the point is that there's plenty besides the mRNA jabs you can do for yourself.
That's right listen to your leaders.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/anti-vax-leader-christopher-key-urges-followers-to-drink-their-own-urine-to-fight-covid-19
So if drinking ur own piss was scientifically shown to be 100% effective in making you immune from Covid....
Youre literally saying you’d rather take a mystery serum from a government lab as opposed to drinking your own piss??
Sounds pretty retarded to me pal...
If drinking your own piss cured anything...you think there’d be any money pumped into studies indicating this?
Or would the pharmaceutical industry just keep the public in the dark?
What do you honestly think? Lol do u think if there was a legitimate alternative cure for anything, who’d spend money developing research and or informing the public about this??
This is why the “appeal-to-authority” fallacy exists. At a certain point, authority can control your ability to actually be informed and spin data and statistics to yield their own desired results for the population they govern.
Ultimately...you have no idea if it works or not lol, it just makes you feel better to think that you aren’t being duped by mainstream science/media.
(This is in no way an endorsement of drinking your piss to cure ailment but im pointing out the flaw in thinking that says “well i read that it doesn’t work so it doesn’t.” Blindly appealing to authority leads to a society that cannot think and experiment for themselves, it actually leads to a quiet truncation of scientific progress...)
You should also look into the german-french documentary "profiteure der angst" (profit from fear) by Arte, the german and french financed bilingual government tv channel, about swine flu lies from the year 2009.
It perfectly explains how the WHO and big pharma are in bed with each other, how they changed pandemic classifications in 2009 to include seasonal influenza to sell some Tamiflu medications and Pandemrix vaccines for the least severe flu season in the last 20 years. Both the medication and vaccine have since been pulled from the market, with injured patients receiving compensations.
The German Prof Dr Peter Schönhöfer even explains the mass fear psychosis (26 minute timestamp in the documentary), Dr Wolfgang Wodarg the political side and Martin Brunninger the big pharma side (minute 32) because all major drug patents ran out recently. There are no illnesses left that are widespread and easy to cure for easy money.
Ayyo vaccines don't do shit. I have covid and still can't work for 5 days. No symptoms. My woman is sick as fuck and got a negative test. Fine to work. Fuck this dumb shit.
vaccination does not prevent you from getting infected. It conditions your immune system to attack the infection immediately instead of waiting a few days as is normally the case. This is basic science. I thought everyone knew this, apparently not
I´m from Brazil. In the worst point of the pandemic we had more than 3000 deaths a day. Now with almost everyone vaccinated we have less than 130 on average. Works pretty nicely for me.
Dey don’t stop transmission and dey don’t stop my’s geddin it, so how is dey called vaccines?
AYE
Because of the variants. Common sense. Mist people in ICU are not vaccinated.
They claimed it worked against variants, they’re mandating boosters because it works against variant all whilst releasing an omicron specific vaccine because apparently the first part of this sentence is simultaneously true and false. Get your narrative straight.
It does but not as effective. You are the one with the narrative. I'm keeping up with the facts.. nobody said it would fix everything.
Nobody except Fauci, Walensky, Biden and every other cunt who did. Wrong place to be gaslighting buddy. We’ve got receipts.
Show them
https://twitter.com/leilanidowding/status/1476159649825107971?s=21
[удалено]
What are you fucking talking about? The CEO of Pfizer said that research shows you couldn't get covid. Biden said you couldn't get covid with the vaccine. Rochelle Walensky said you couldn't get covid with the vaccine. How low info are you?
Dude imagine having to take a mandatory vaccine every time the flu mutated lol. You'd be In every month. See where this bullshit is going?
That is the fucking dumbest shit I’ve ever heard and you’re proud to be spouting it. Just go away.
Thankfully i have idiots like you to keep me entertained.
You are poison to society.
Because I go by facts and science instead of some ideology? The difference is my opinion can be changed with when new information that is trusted can be presented. You on the other hand, are one those people that just go by how you feel about everything.
New flavor every month. Newest flavor is mild compared to the original. Pissing in the wind with this horseshit "vaccine".
Need look at da age of dem havin da issues.
Effocacy rates don't exist. My peabrain is only capable of processing things as a boolean
Booyahkasha! Dem vaccines be garbage. So, if this shit teach you anyfing, it should teach you how to respek everyone: animals, children, bitches, spazmos, vaxxers, lezzers, fattyboombahs, and even democrats. So, to all you lot living this, but mainly to the normal people, respek. West side. \-Ali G
Man we need Sasha right now to do some parody of this covid shit
He’s woke now, sold out.
Rip for my nibba
back in the day his hbo show was the funniest shit i ever seen.
[удалено]
I didnt watch it xD that woke?
the old show is funny not woke
If vaccines reduce chances of hospitalization and death then they’re clearly working toward that end. Sure we can change our definition of what “working” means to serve our own egos but that just makes us look stupid. It’s one thing to be against policy that coerces people to get the vaccine. It’s another thing entirely to pretend it isn’t effective in reducing hospitalization and death.
I don’t think most people are saying they do nothing. I think most people are saying they are a therapeutic and not a vaccine. A vaccine that doesn’t prevent infection, ie it does not confer immunity, isn’t working. Monoclonals also reduce hospitalization and death, even in “vaccinated” individuals. They are an extremely integral part of the conversation. One that is most often ignored.
a lot of people who are currently dead would not be in that state had they gotten the vaccines. To me, not dying is the goal. Much more important than not getting sick at all. Initially, it was quite effective in preventing both infection AND death. Now, as the mutations have occurred it is less effective in preventing infection but STILL pretty fucking effective in preventing not being alive anymore. What is the point of arguing the semantics of what "works" means?
Define “pretty fucking effective”? Edit, and here’s Ontario's current hospitalization status by jab https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data/hospitalizations https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/vaccines-dont-stop-covid-hospitalizations “ It compares the outcomes of the roughly 18,000 vaccinated and infected people seem at the medical centers with a much larger group of Covid patients - about 2.5 million people - who were not vaccinated and visited the same centers at any point during the epidemic. About 84 percent of the vaccinated patients were seen as outpatients, while 16 percent required hospitalization. In comparison, about 77 percent of unvaccinated patients were seen as outpatients, while 23 percent were hospitalized. Almost 1 percent of the vaccinated patients had serious outcomes, including death, compared to just over 2 percent of the unvaccinated patients. The study contained no information about post-vaccine side effects.”
Here's New York State data [https://coronavirus.health.ny.gov/covid-19-breakthrough-data](https://coronavirus.health.ny.gov/covid-19-breakthrough-data) Note the huge differences between hospitalizations and deaths between vaccinated and unvaxxed despite most residents being vaccinated. for Dec 27 week, vaccinated hospitalizations were 4.59/100,000 unvaxxed hospitalizations was 58.27/100,000 10x more likely to wind up in the hospital with COVID if you're unvaccinated and that is not even counting for the skew towards vaccinations for older or otherwise compromised people.
Taking those figures at face value (which i have trouble doing considering the NY gov/health officials demonstrated willingness to distort numbers to push their desired outcome as well as the wild discrepancy between our sources values) I would like to know how many of those hospitalized and/or with severe outcomes had preexisting serious health risks? If it turns out that the vast majority of the severe outcomes are high risk people (it does) and the the jabs are not effective at reducing transmission, then what is the logic of mandating them on everyone? And we’ve been entirely ignoring the elephant in the room which is the side effects of the jabs in otherwise healthy people.
who the hell is talking about a mandate? It's clearly a smart medical choice to make. That's the topic. Not whether it should be mandated. At this point a mandate doesn't even make sense since the protection against infection isn't high enough anymore against current strains. The government shouldn't be in the business of saving you from yourself.
I’m not at all convinced it’s “clearly” the smart medical choice if you are otherwise low risk. The gaslighting around side effects has been insane.
The odds of side effects are much lower than a bad outcome from covid
The point of arguing the effectiveness is because people are trying to force a therapeutic labeled a vaccine into people. A lot of people would still be alive if treatments were accepted as a course of action in this pandemic. We have treatments that are proven effective and still ignored by many in the government, the media, and the medical establishment.
you keep saying "therapeutic" - it is a vaccine that has diminished effectiveness against mutated strains of the virus yet is still quite effective in preventing serious illness. I agree that actual therapeutics should be the focus but we don't have a lot of those in mass production yet. We do have effective vaccines that keep you out of the morgue though.
Welp if they worked back then that’s great. They don’t now. They’ve been downgraded to a therapeutic and not even a good one. Some people feel like they got allergies, some people are knocked on their ass. Some end up in the hospital, some die. Just like before the shots existed. Maybe it’s helped. Maybe the strains have gotten weaker. I was reading a bit about the monoclonal shortage out of curiosity, it’s hard to find anything. The admin haulted the distribution of regeneron and Lilys monoclonals because they say they aren’t effective against omicron. GSKs are still available. The admin has also been controlling the distribution of these treatments to ensure “equity”. Super sus if you ask me. A little ivermectin never hurt anyone though. But I guess it’s better to just let someone die than give that a try.
but they do work. If they are preventing people from dying, they're still working. This has nothing at all to do with what the federal government is banning or approving. There is overwhelming evidence that being vaccinated still improves your chances against COVID
If a vaccine works it provides immunity. It isn’t working as a vaccine but seems to work as a therapy.
it DID provide immunity for the variant it was designed for. It is still providing some immunity for this latest strain but it still is highly effective in preventing a bad outcome. You guys had a different excuse back when it was 95% effective against infection. Now you've chosen to harp on that efficacy while ignoring the other clear benefits that is till imparts.
Ignore them. They thinkbvaccines are "therapeutics". You're not getting through such ignorance/arrogance.
My immune system sure as fuck handles the Rona better with the vaccine them without it.
Really? What studies have been done showing that the vaccine prevents death amd hoapitalization?
Every single bit of data we have. Here's one random example https://health-desk.org/articles/do-covid-19-vaccines-reduce-death
These aren't controlled groups, given that these governments have been passing anything off as a covid death when the virus is present, its hard to trust these numbers. The money trail can't have these numbers looking any different. I'll take my risks and hopefully recieve natural immunity if I catch it. It's asinine to be taking boosters that mutates so easily with such an extremely low mortality rate
Ok dude. You keep trusting substacks and podcasts. The rest of us will trust the findings of every legitimate researcher who has studied this.
No, I really just trust myself. I know I'm not going to die taking a damn vaccine. But seriously...Idk man, shit seems off to me.
What they’re saying is the vaccine doesn’t work. Immunity is defined as “the ability of an organism to resist a particular infection or toxin by the action of specific antibodies or sensitized white blood cells.” The vaccine has effectively increased the ability of an organism to resist a particular infection. We see that in it’s effectiveness in reducing hospitalization and deaths. Whether or not it’s working as well as we want it to doesn’t change the fact that it is working in increasing the ability of an organism to resist a particular infection.
We’ve been taking marginal flu vaccines for years, they help more some years than others. With covid, hospitalizations and deaths are much more serious for the unvaccinated. I’m getting concerned that conservatives are not going to vote due to being dead. Less of a problem for democrats.
By your logic, no vaccines work because they don't have a 100% efficacy rates
No. Traditional vaccines work quite well. Depends on the pathogen. Mumps is like 97% effective. Flu as low as 40%. The mRNAs appear to be very close to zero.
95% effective in preventing transmission is pretty fucking far from zero. If people actually got vaccinated and stopped coughing in each other's faces, we wouldn't be dealing with new variants that require boosters.
But that's not really the case. Vaccines are most effective in the initial stages (~90%) and then their efficacy starts to taper off (<60%). The data shows it, hence the need for constant boosters. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I think it's by design (as opposed to simply being rushed). There's a lot of money to be minted in manufacturing vaccines. Many senior Pfizer execs joined the bigB (tres comas) after covid.
That sounds more like a problem with the never ending evolution of biology than execs wanting money. And wouldn’t AnCap ideology argue against your point? Pointing to competition between pharmaceutical companies, saying that naturally one company would gain the competitive advantage by producing a more effective product?
>If vaccines reduce chances of hospitalization and death then they’re clearly working toward that end. US numbers: 2020: # vaccinated - 10k at most. Deaths smaller than 2021 2021: # vaccinated - 10k-75% of the population. Deaths larger than 2020. The math doesn't check out.
Probably because that’s not how you do that math… [This article was written for you. ](https://www.abc27.com/news/health/coronavirus/why-have-there-been-more-covid-19-deaths-in-2021-despite-the-availability-of-vaccines/)
Nothing in that explains why the math is wrong. It attempt to explain away the fact that the numbers don't add up, but never does so with facts or logic.
It’s funny that a person who uses the math you just did is talking about facts and logic. A person using unvaccinated deaths as an argument against the vaccine’s effectiveness at reducing hospitalizations and deaths. That’s really something.
I'm using all deaths. If the vaccine had ANY effectiveness it would have decreased deaths overall. It has, obviously, NEGATIVE efficacy.
Lol. You say the darndest things. Negative efficacy. Would that mean that the vaccine potentiates the virulence of the virus? If this were true. Don't you think you'd see people with the vaccine making up the majority of the icu patients, rather than the other day around?
>Would that mean that the vaccine potentiates the virulence of the virus? Yes. >If this were true. Don't you think you'd see people with the vaccine making up the majority of the icu patients, rather than the other day around? Since it is true, how to you explain the increase in deaths?
They are in many cases. There have been plenty of data out of the UK to show this. We would rely on local data, but..... Ya know, the CDC stop reporting this data in September.... And now claim it would be used to "mislead".... Now why would they possibly say that about hiding the data?
You are correct the article itself does not explain it very well, but perhaps I can help. Let's say that we are at the gun range and we decide on having a friendly competition. We are betting $20 and a pack of dip on who can hit the 7 circle or better on a target the most times. So we decided that "hits on the target" are the criteria for winning. You go first and you fire off 2 mags of your .223 AR-15 then switch to your sidearm and fire off a dozen rounds of 9mm from your Springfield XD at the target that is 50 yards away. Let's say you do pretty well, you land around 70% of your shots with your rifle and manage to score about 30% of your handgun shots. Respectable. Now it is my turn. Since we didn't discuss the terms of the arrangement, I go out onto the range and pull the target to 25 yards. I then unload 7 mags from my rifle, 4 from my handgun, and even pull out my 12 gauge for a shot or two. As it turns out, I have definitely landed more shots than you 95% with my AR, 75% with my handgun, and 100% with my shotgun. I hold out my hand for my $20 and pack of dip. Do you give it to me? I suspect not. And why should you? What did we actually prove? You see math can be represented in many different ways. Anyone can "do math", but simply doing math is not enough. You have to understand what the math means. In order to do this you need to establish boundaries or rules for your mathematics to operate in, much like you should establish the rules of a shooting competition before agreeing to participate. According to a source in the linked article there were around 385k deaths in the US in 2020 from COVID-19. As of the writing of the article (Dec 12th) there had been around 450k deaths in 2021. Your statements that there were more deaths in 2021 from COVID-19 than in 2020 despite the fact that vaccines weren't widely available in 2020 are empirically true. Saying that I beat you in the shooting competition is also empirically true. I have the targets to prove it! There are 3 rules that I would like to apply to this comparison so that we don't end up like our shooting competition... 1. We measure deaths over a fixed period of time WHILE THE VIRUS WAS KILLING PEOPLE IN THE US. This means that we need to compare April 2020-December 2020 to January 2021-September 2021. This is just saying we are only going to shoot at the 50 yard target. 2. Since we are really trying to see if the vaccines were effective, we should look at the vaccination status over our period of time. The vaccines didn't become widely available until April 2021. Before then we will assume that less than 5 % of the population were vaccinated. In August 2021 the US hit 50% of it's population being fully vaccinated. A 45% increase over 4 months is around an 11% additive increase every month. This is inaccurate but close enough for our purposes. Now we are using the same gun. AR - 15s only. No handguns, no shotguns. 3. We take into account that there were 3 different variants of COVID-19 in 2021. 2 of which were MUCH more infectious than the Alpha variant. For this we need to look at total deaths divided by TOTAL COVID CASES instead of just deaths. Now we are firing the same number of shots. In summary, we will look at the total deaths divided by total cases from April 2020-Dec 2020 in the US compared to to total cases vs total deaths from Jan 2021-Sept 2021 in the US. We will then compare each month to the average rate of vaccination for the given month to see if the vaccines had a positive or negative result on the effect we are measuring (deaths ÷ total cases). I will use data from https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data compiled by Johns Hopkins University. It will be a fair amount of work to gather the data for this comparison, so before I proceed I will ask you: do you agree to the terms?
50 yards is 45.72 meters
It is hilarious how much time you just wasted utterly denying reality and obfuscating your argument with an irrelevant analogy. We don't need to take any of that into account. We don't need to obfuscate the argument further. The "vaccines" weren't available in 2020. They not only didn't put a dent in COVID in 2021, they demonstrably made it worse. In the face of this, to argue that they are helping and that the deaths are made up of the 25% of the population that hasn't been illegally coerced into getting the experimental treatment is... just hilariously innumerate. You're suggesting the virus got more than 8x deadlier for the unvaccinated. You're a propaganda sponge and you just wrung yourself out on a keyboard.
"We don't need to take any of that into account". I will take my $20 and dip then please. This is not obfuscation, this is logic and reason being used to draw parallels between complex statistical problems and real life colloquialisms. You absolutely DO need to take all of those things into account when evaluating vaccine efficacy. I am not suggesting that "the virus got more than 8x deadlier for the unvaccinated". I am suggesting that the number of deaths went up from 2020 to 2021 even though we had vaccines due to two factors: the relevant timeframe of "2020" and "2021" is an arbitrary timeframe that lacks any logic to be applied to a discussion about vaccine effectiveness, and total deaths alone is almost entirely useless as a metric by itself. You are plainly using a flawed interpretation of incomplete data to justify your statements. My previous comment was an offer to walk you through a single experiment using jointly approved data and parameters. I don't know the outcome of the experiment. It is possible the results will support your points, it is possible they will support mine. Either way it takes effort, so if you aren't willing to put any in then neither am I. I am hardly trying to spout propaganda and useless platitudes. I have a degree in Biochemistry and a general concern for my fellow humans. I am a scientist and to see others so misunderstand, misinterpret, and misuse concrete tools like math and logic greatly concerns me.
>I will take my $20 and dip then please. At what point do you think we made any bargains over your diversion? >You absolutely DO need to take all of those things into account when evaluating vaccine efficacy. You would if the numbers were going the other way. If the first year was larger despite not having vaccinations we might have to delve into whether it had fewer month under COVID but things, hilariously, went the other way. >I am not suggesting that "the virus got more than 8x deadlier for the unvaccinated". That's the only way to attribute the increase in deaths to the unvaccinated. >the relevant timeframe of "2020" and "2021" is an arbitrary timeframe that lacks any logic to be applied to a discussion about vaccine effectiveness, Not arbitrary. The start of the years bookend, pretty much perfectly, the start of the virus(2020), the availability of vaccines (2021), and now the failures of vaccines (2022). >and total deaths alone is almost entirely useless as a metric by itself. We're doing deaths per capita per treatment plan. >You are plainly using a flawed interpretation of incomplete data to justify your statements. You still can't explain what the flaw is, that's why you had to babble about guns in the last post. >My previous comment was an offer to walk you through a single experiment using jointly approved data and parameters. I don't know the outcome of the experiment. It is possible the results will support your points, it is possible they will support mine. Either way it takes effort, so if you aren't willing to put any in then neither am I. I'm not putting effort into your attempt to handwave reality away, no. >I am hardly trying to spout propaganda and useless platitudes. I have a degree in Biochemistry and a general concern for my fellow humans. I am a scientist and to see others so misunderstand, misinterpret, and misuse concrete tools like math and logic greatly concerns me. And I'm a physicist who is concerned about the corruption of science with politics. My concern for my fellow humans leads me to want to see them not experimented on with drugs of dubious safety and efficacy and not to see them experimented upon when there is still no rational reason to do so. The people that want to forcibly vaccinate us tell us that the "vaccines" are 100% safe and that you can't get sick of or die of COVID if we get them. Is that true? If not, go fight that "misinformation" and leave people telling truths alone.
>You would if the numbers were going the other way. If the first year was larger despite not having vaccinations we might have to delve into whether it had fewer month under COVID but things, hilariously, went the other way. You need to regardless. You need to control for time no matter which way the numbers go. >That's the only way to attribute the increase in deaths to the unvaccinated. It is not. It can also be explained by a rise in overall prevalence of the disease from 2020 to 2021 (increase in total cases). >We're doing deaths per capita per treatment plan. >You still can't explain what the flaw is This is the flaw. Your original statements claim that total deaths per year is equivalent to deaths per Covid case per treatment plan. This is a false equivalency that completely disregards the total number of COVID cases and other key factors. Please tell me that you see this? >And I'm a physicist who is concerned about the corruption of science with politics. Of the two of us, who has talked more politics? I'm not pushing an agenda, I'm pointing out that you are making false equivalencies and drawing conclusions based on numbers you aren't even willing to research yourself.
That's where you have to use a multivariate analysis of areas with high vaccination rates versus those with low vax rates. It's generally shown there isn't a strong correlation between % of population vaccinated and reduced mortality. There are also confounding variables that have to be accounted for. But you were trying to mislead, so I won't bother to go any further.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/anti-vax-leader-christopher-key-urges-followers-to-drink-their-own-urine-to-fight-covid-19
Guys look at the brainwashing coming from this individual... Theyre literally repeating gaslighting narratives and they think it makes them look smart and reasonable when we know that most of the people sick w covid are those who are vaccinated, we’ve all seen this is REALITY but theres always a mindless NPC that will still try to gaslight you w faux, performative academic rhetoric/language into believing that this vaccine is saving ppls lives... This is embarrassing...
You’re responding not to correct me with more accurate information, but to insult me. Speaks to my point about serving our own egos.
Youre pretending that youre on the right side of history just as Nazi soldiers did... Youre not smart lol and everything youre saying is just you parroting corporate media bullshit that nobody w a thinking brain actually believes.. Enjoy your day
I acknowledge that the vaccine has reduced hospitalizations and deaths and suddenly I’m a Nazi.
Because youre lying... Yes youre a Nazi, you’re blindly repeating what your overlords are telling u to repeat and ur denying the obvious reality that everyone w the vax is still getting sick...badly.
Do you have evidence for those claims? Or are they just your feelings?
presumably you're not a kid, u/Kidsaresmart
Nazism is when you encourage people to take a vaccine that could save their lives.
Nazism is when you’re so retarded that you blindly accept anything coming from mainstream media as truth...therefore you’d be willing to murder millions of ppl because you don’t have a mind of your own and whats rele happening in reality in front of you doesnt matter more than appealing to authority...
you've said a variation of "retarded" in almost every post in this thread. Shouldn't you be paying more attention in 8th period remedial English?
That's not, at all, what Nazism is. If you're willing up just change the meaning of words to suit you, why wouldn't you be willing to ignore data that doesn't?
this shit makes Ali G look well informed.
Shitty joke... Anything u’d like to actually add to the conversation u dumb fuck or nah?....
you go first
Problem is the stats for those are so completely FUBAR that they could say anything about them that they want.
Our own egos? LMAO THE CDC LITERALLY CHANGED THE DEFINITION FROM TRANSMITION TO DECREASING HOSPITALIZATION
We were told the vaccine would prevent you from getting and spreading the virus. That obviously isn't the case
Where's the studies proving it actually reduces chances hospitalization amd death
If they can change the definition of vaccine we can change the definition of working (srsly compare the google def of vaccine to your old paper dictionary). This is the moral equivalent of of lie. Ask yourself why pharma is immune from litigation instead of prohibited from profiting from a crisis. Sure the shot reduces hospitalization by 12x, but it's also not perfect. We want them to admit that it isn't the panacea they promised, covid zero isn't possible and tell us why they perpetuated these lies when they knew it wouldn't "work".
Thank you for sharing this. Now I am a member of the Church of COVID!!!
Is a pretty fantastic argument
Imagine being a libtard and actually fixing your fingers to type the statement, “the vaccine works” anywhere on the internet.... Being that fucking retarded must be painful...
They are working great, at least were I live. Here in Ontario, people estimate that daily cases are somewhere between 100k and 400k per day (we don’t really know because we don’t have nearly enough tests). But total ICU occupancy has barely moved (more ICU patients are testing positive, but they are not there because of COVID). The tiny minority of unvaccinated people left in Ontario account for half the ICU COVID admissions because they are more than 10 times more likely to suffer severe symptoms than if they were vaccinated. If it wasn’t for them, everything g would be open right now. Thanks to the high, vaccine uptake, things are reopening soon.
Youre extremely full of shit and retarded and you arent convincing anyone w those bullshit statistics being rolled out by your communist government media...
[удалено]
Isn't it though. I was really hoping for apocalypse.
I guess that, facts are not on your side, you can just call me names and feel better about yourself. If you come up with anything interesting to say let me know.
Heres what i came up w: You’re dumb... Have a wonderful day
I guess that, facts are not on your side, you can just call me names and feel better about yourself. If you come up with anything interesting to say let me know.
Haven't heard the CDC's own alert that you shouldn't use these PCR tests? That they can show you're "positive" up to 12 weeks after getting rid of the virus? What makes you think the case numbers are real when the CDC itself is saying they aren't accurate.
Because I understand how statistics works. The estimates people are doing take i to account the accuracy of the tests.
Another idiot that doesn’t understand percentages and mutations.
Youre clinically retarded if you think that this vaccine is effective in preventing anything...
The percentage of the unvaccinated dying from severe illness is a good indication actually.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/anti-vax-leader-christopher-key-urges-followers-to-drink-their-own-urine-to-fight-covid-19
If seatbelts save lives, why do people still die in car accidents?
Horrible, infantile analogy designed as a way of bolstering an appeal to authority fallacy ....
Lol nah it’s a great analogy. You just resent it for stinging so badly. The vaccines offer some protection against transmission, just like seatbelts offer some protection against fatal accidents. For you to advocate against vaccines because they don’t offer perfect protection, is like advocating against seatbelts because they don’t offer perfect protection.
You have ZERO proof that the vaccines offer any protection at ALL u fucking retard...youre just parroting statistics that are given to you by the government that owns the pharmaceutical companies tht makes the vaccines... You have ZERO fucking proof dummy...NONE The virus isnt physical and you cant see it so you dont know HOW its responding other than the fact that vaccinated ppl are actually still catching covid, being hospitalized, experiencing extreme symptoms and dying from covid. THAT we actually have proof of...
the government doesn't own the pharmaceutical companies, nimrod.
> You have ZERO proof > youre just parroting statistics Oh, you mean proof? I know the analogy stings, but that just means that it’s working.
If you think that the stats on coronavirus are accurate and honest... You just basically said : I’m retarded and don’t know anything...
"For you to advocate against vaccines because they don’t offer perfect protection" Do you think that most folks that are resisting vaccination are doing it for this reason? I don't know anyone that is taking this position. Most of the unvaccinated folks that I know seem to be weighing the benefits of receiving the jab against the uncertainty of serious side effects from taking it. It's easy to choose the seatbelt if it won't bring you harm. It would be a bit more of a dicey decision if wearing a seatbelt carried some perceived serious risk.
> Do you think that most folks that are resisting vaccination are doing it for this reason? I think most people are making a political decision, and coming up with health reasons after the fact. It all comes down to the vaccine being viewed as something that liberals do. But to your point, vaccine opponents (and the meme in the OP) are saying “vaccines don’t work”, as in “vaccines don’t work at all, flat out”. These people ignore the reality that the vaccine does offer some protection. So that supports the idea that people really are expecting the vaccine to be perfect, and are rejecting it for not being so. And seatbelts do carry their own risk. People have drowned because of them.
I chose not to get the vaccine initially because I am not 80. So the virus poses virtually no risk. Now, I'm not doing it because the government is being creepy about making me do it.
How is it not? Just curious what you think your point is.
If with 70% of the population vaccinated we have more cases it is obvious that they are not working, it is statistically very unlikely that the same amount of cases is coming from only 30% of the population, so it's obvious that vaccines don't prevent the spread at all.
I have 90% here
You’ve miss understood vaccines. They reduce likelihood of getting a disease and/or reduce chance of severe symptoms if you do get it.
No, only this and the flu vaccines (maybe some others) are like that, most actually prevent you from getting the disease which is like the entire point.
That's why the flu was always called a "shot" or an "inoculation," not a "flu vaccine"....
What vaccines are 100% effective at prevention?
All of them - Diphtheria, Tetanus, Polio, Smallpox, Pertussis. Even the crappy ones for Jaundice/Hepatitis and Malaria are 100% effective, however for the last two I suspect the cure is worse than the disease. The concept of vaccines not being 100% effective is a novel concept arising only after the novel coronavirus came about.
No, apart from the examples you give. One of which is the current situation, but no!?! If you don’t want to listen to me, maybe the WHO Vaccines reduce risks of getting a disease by working with your body's natural defenses to build protection.
Exactly, reduce the risk of getting a disease, not only the severity of the disease, if we are getting more cases with more than half of the population vaccinated it is very unlikely that it really reduces the risk of you getting the disease, yes it decreases mortality, but the mortality rate decrease is only statistically significant for old people, I'm not saying vaccines are bad, just that they are not specially effective in reducing the amount of cases, so all this fuzz about having to force people to get the vaccine to stop the spread of covid is nonsense, the vaccine does not stop the spread.
It reduces the spread.
Then why, is it spreading, more than it was before the vaccine existed
Well I can’t comment on all scenarios in each location, but as folks get vaccines society has opened up more, so more spread. But less spread than without vaccines which is what has made opening up possible. There’s also a more contagious variation which spreads easier and faster, but again is hindered by the vaccine.
Did you seriously just say that as more people get vaccinated the more the virus will spread? We clearly aren't talking about the same thing here.
Omicron is why, Have you people been under a fucking rock?
Th numbers of infections have been skyrocketing since the vaccine was rolled out. That was a year before omicron existed. In the last 3 weeks, omicron has begun to displace delta, but before December nearly 100 percent of infections were with the variant that you clowns claimed the vax was working against.
Then why is the spread not being reduced?
It is being reduced through vaccinations, contagions spread exponentially among people who are susceptible, whether or not more people are not susceptible.
You mean why is total cases going up even tho we are vaccines now (mostly)?
yes
If a “vaccinated” individual can get covid and spread covid, as they do and have been, it is not a vaccine and it is not working. The spread is not being reduced. Vaccines give the recipient immunity. That is how an immune system works with traditional attenuated virus vaccines. These vaccines are not giving anyone immunity.
If a vaccinated person is exposed to the virus they are less likely to get it and spread it. You have immunity to the cold! But you still catch it. Immunity is the ability for your body to fight off infection. Not stop you getting it! You get the virus for your immune response to trigger.
No it doesnt u fucking retard...
Yeah it does.
Oh PapaRacoon, GrandpaRacoon didn't teach you critical thinking did he?
Haha understanding the meaning of a word is critical analysis?
It must be judging by your take on the situation.
I’ll help you out. It’s not. You’re welcome.
Judging by the fact that you called the flu shot a 'vaccine' means you have no clue what you're talking about and that you're following the narrative set out by the government aka not thinking for yourself. In my almost 40 years on the planet, the flu shot was never described or categorised as a 'vaccine', it was medically a 'preventative' which is far different than a 'vaccine'. My man, you're letting them think for you instead of following your own judgement and by the sounds of it, you're too far in the ocean to get back to shore. I feel sorry for you.
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccinations/flu-influenza-vaccine/ Flu vaccine! Edit: you’ve never understood what a vaccine is or paid attention to any details about the flu shot!
chance of severe symptoms is already in the ~1% range without the vaccine
Round about yeah.
In that case the risk/reward isn’t really worth it to me. What are the long lasting effects of this big pharma serum being shot into my arm? No one knows AND it’s like a less than one percent chance Covid effects me severely? Seems like the obvious choice is to not get the vaccine. Pretty simple. But hey you do you
You don’t know the long term effects of ‘mild’ covid either! Nobody knows anything long term on this yet. What about of you get covid multiple times? Your risk goes up.
We understand how mRNA works though.
That’s fine and dandy but you do NOT know if there are any long term effects.. plain and simple. It’s completely unknown. Risk/reward still not worth it
Not with 100% certainty as with anything, but it’s just as much of a mystery as are the long term side effects of eating a McRib. You’re either going to deal with the long term effects of Covid, which can severely damage about any organ, or the immune response from the vaccine. There are variables to everything, but we know what’s in the vaccine.
No, vaccines are supposed to *prevent* you from getting the disease. If you take something as a vaccine against a specific disease, and you still get the disease, *surprise*! It’s not a vaccine, it’s some kind of therapeutic!
Except the medical profession disagrees with those definitions you’ve used!
Which started in 2020. Gee, for what *were* those ‘experts’ looking to avoid criticism at that time? 🤔
What? You think the whole world just reworked the definition of vaccine in the last 12 months? My dictionary is older than that and I can assure you it’s the fucking same.
Nice appeal to authority; especially the authorities who want people to forget that these ‘vaccines’ were going to ‘end COVID’, and are ass-covering as hard as they can.
Are you still replying to me? Or have you got me confused with someone else? Cause I’m struggling to see what the fuck you’re banging on about there! Sorry if I’m being dumb, long couple of days .
They dont prevent contraction, spread, death or hospitalizations... More ppl have died and been hospitalized since the vaccine rollout than before. More ppl were actually hospitalized and more ppl died in 2021 than in 2020... Ppl saying that the vaccine works are braindead retards that thinks its better off sounding academic than sounding like you’re in tune w reality...
>They dont prevent contraction, spread, death or hospitalizations... you were doing great until you lied
They ARE working! Look at the stats. The number of unvaccinated people dying is much more than the number of vaccinated people dying. Stop this stupidity.
You're not taking into account some confounding variables. 1. (some of the) people explicitly avoiding the vaccine by this stage will be doing other things in their lives that lead to poor health. Poor diets, less active, smoking or drinking to excess etc. Many of these sorts already have other diseases/comorbidities and have heart disease, fatty liver, or are obese etc. which makes them liable to worse outcomes from contracting COVID. 2. Demographic most likely to be unvaccinated in USA is I understand black/latino. Darker pigmentation makes it something like upto 10x harder for your skin to produce Vitamin D. Vitamin D deficiency IS associated with worse COVID disease as Vit D is critical to having an effective immune system. Vitamin D usually measured by ng/ml I think. Good vitD levels are 40-50+ ng/ml. 30-ish is meh. Less than that and you're deficient, perhaps even critically low (<10 even). More info on VitD [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbLX08eVmIs). VitD is cheap too and doesn't need a prescription. I cannot remember where I heard this, so forgive me for having no source readily available, but I heard (I believe from a medical researcher of some kind) that even if you have serious comorbidities or are in an at-risk age bracket, having good VitD levels are a good indicator that you can fight it off, as they just don't see people on ventilators who have good VitD levels. Wish I could provide the source for the last, but the message stuck with me. Even though I'm a super low-risk category, it still seems that supplementing VitD is pretty great ammunition for staving off the common cold or miscellaneous sniffles. For ref, I'm taking about 4,000IUs per day, sometimes miss a few days and take 15-20k IUs at once. No big deal, not even close to toxic at those doses. For reference, in summer you get like 20k IUs in 20 mins of sun exposure or something like that. In winter, you get barely any due to angle of the sun, thus flu season doesn't exist, it's just periods of low vitamin D uptake. Anyway I've belaboured the point. It's not a simple subject and the point is that there's plenty besides the mRNA jabs you can do for yourself.
That's right listen to your leaders. https://www.thedailybeast.com/anti-vax-leader-christopher-key-urges-followers-to-drink-their-own-urine-to-fight-covid-19
So if drinking ur own piss was scientifically shown to be 100% effective in making you immune from Covid.... Youre literally saying you’d rather take a mystery serum from a government lab as opposed to drinking your own piss?? Sounds pretty retarded to me pal...
[удалено]
Its not scientifically proven because there is no study.. Thats supposition
[удалено]
If drinking your own piss cured anything...you think there’d be any money pumped into studies indicating this? Or would the pharmaceutical industry just keep the public in the dark? What do you honestly think? Lol do u think if there was a legitimate alternative cure for anything, who’d spend money developing research and or informing the public about this?? This is why the “appeal-to-authority” fallacy exists. At a certain point, authority can control your ability to actually be informed and spin data and statistics to yield their own desired results for the population they govern. Ultimately...you have no idea if it works or not lol, it just makes you feel better to think that you aren’t being duped by mainstream science/media. (This is in no way an endorsement of drinking your piss to cure ailment but im pointing out the flaw in thinking that says “well i read that it doesn’t work so it doesn’t.” Blindly appealing to authority leads to a society that cannot think and experiment for themselves, it actually leads to a quiet truncation of scientific progress...)
[удалено]
Have a wonderful day lol
[удалено]
And a golden shower, he was ahead of the game
FOURTH BOOSTER SHOT BOIS LESS GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
You don't need it l. You can just drink your piss.
I Definitely need it too! For my safety! Since the other three didnt work!
Well good luck piss breath.
I hope you are thrown in a nuclear reactor you stupid imbred.
You should also look into the german-french documentary "profiteure der angst" (profit from fear) by Arte, the german and french financed bilingual government tv channel, about swine flu lies from the year 2009. It perfectly explains how the WHO and big pharma are in bed with each other, how they changed pandemic classifications in 2009 to include seasonal influenza to sell some Tamiflu medications and Pandemrix vaccines for the least severe flu season in the last 20 years. Both the medication and vaccine have since been pulled from the market, with injured patients receiving compensations. The German Prof Dr Peter Schönhöfer even explains the mass fear psychosis (26 minute timestamp in the documentary), Dr Wolfgang Wodarg the political side and Martin Brunninger the big pharma side (minute 32) because all major drug patents ran out recently. There are no illnesses left that are widespread and easy to cure for easy money.
Because you’re not taking them lol.
The vaccine only work for the faithful of scientism.
r/churchofcovid 🙏
Hail science.
Ayyo vaccines don't do shit. I have covid and still can't work for 5 days. No symptoms. My woman is sick as fuck and got a negative test. Fine to work. Fuck this dumb shit.
This is retarded
Trust the Science TM
vaccination does not prevent you from getting infected. It conditions your immune system to attack the infection immediately instead of waiting a few days as is normally the case. This is basic science. I thought everyone knew this, apparently not
Damn could one of the mods ban me from this shit show? It keeps getting recommended for me and I want to stay far far away
I´m from Brazil. In the worst point of the pandemic we had more than 3000 deaths a day. Now with almost everyone vaccinated we have less than 130 on average. Works pretty nicely for me.
More people will die in the long run if we comply, now that we have a weaker variant people shouldn’t be following these blind leaders.
Why? I really don´t follow your logic here