Vaccine or not?

[hog88]

That’s why I consult a doctor before deciding to ingest dewormer.

Chew tobacco and worms will never be a worry.

 

[Rickyvol77]

This analogy is dumber than the seat belt one. Keep on making yourself look like an idiot though. We love it!!!

Talk about a typical strawman argument. “You don’t believe in one new vaccine, thus you don’t believe in all vaccines”

 

[whodeycin85]

What % of the staff is vaccinated?
How many employees vs. how many confirmed cases?

You need those numbers for that statement to have any meaning. They could have 10,000 employees, 99% of whom are vaccinated, and only 70 cases. (So 14% of unvaccinated employees have cases while only .6% of unvaccinated people.

Or they could have 25% of employees vaccinated and have 1000 cases. So then you’ve got 800 cases coming from 2500 vaccinated employees.

One is newsworthy and concerning. The other is the vaccine working. Both have 80% infection rates among vaccinated employees.

So 55 out 7k had Covid...80% of the 55 were vaxed....no idea whether the other healthy people are vaxed..safe to assume its mixed...but it doesn't matter whether it 100 out of 10k or 1 million out of 100 million..if 80% of those sick with covid are vaxed thats a problem..now if you gonna try and play it against the population as a whole...then i hope you made that argument against covid as a whole..because it only has effect 10% of the population and that count reinfected...

 

[bamawriter]

So 55 out 7k had Covid...80% of the 55 were vaxed....no idea whether the other healthy people are vaxed..safe to assume its mixed...but it doesn't matter whether it 100 out of 10k or 1 million out of 100 million..if 80% of those sick with covid are vaxed thats a problem..now if you gonna try and play it against the population as a whole...then i hope you made that argument against covid as a whole..because it only has effect 10% of the population and that count reinfected...

It's only a problem if the vaccinated population doesn't heavily outweigh the unvaccinated population. If 90% of the 7,000 are fully vaxxed, then the fact that 44 out of 6300 fully vaxxed people got sick is not at all worrisome.

 

[RockyTop85]

So 55 out 7k had Covid...80% of the 55 were vaxed....no idea whether the other healthy people are vaxed..safe to assume its mixed...but it doesn't matter whether it 100 out of 10k or 1 million out of 100 million..if 80% of those sick with covid are vaxed thats a problem..now if you gonna try and play it against the population as a whole...then i hope you made that argument against covid as a whole..because it only has effect 10% of the population and that count reinfected...

If you don’t know what percentage of the whole is vaccinated or naturally inoculated then this is a meaningless clickbait headline. There’s no “it’s still a problem because…”

As the number of vaccinated people in a given population approaches 100%, the number of cases among vaccinated people will also approach 100%.

 

[whodeycin85]

It's only a problem if the vaccinated population doesn't heavily outweigh the unvaccinated population. If 90% of the 7,000 are fully vaxxed, then the fact that 44 out of 6300 fully vaxxed people is not at all worrisome.

That doesn't matter if those getting covid are majority vaxxed...so if thats ont worries some neither is 36M out 328M. 10% is not worries some...so why the lockdown and masking...seems awfully hypocritcal to me

 

[whodeycin85]

If you don’t know what percentage of the whole is vaccinated or naturally inoculated then this is a meaningless clickbait headline. There’s no “it’s still a problem because…”

As the number of vaccinated people in a given population approaches 100%, the number of cases among vaccinated people will also approach 100%.

Again if your using that argument then you have to realized that an illness that effects leas the 10% of you population most of which where eldery..is not a worriesome illness correct?

 

[overseasorange2]

You think making a completely stupid analogy like this is common sense?

 

[Sea Ray]

What % of the staff is vaccinated?
How many employees vs. how many confirmed cases?

You need those numbers for that statement to have any meaning. They could have 10,000 employees, 99% of whom are vaccinated, and only 70 cases. (So 14% of unvaccinated employees have cases while only .6% of unvaccinated people.

Or they could have 25% of employees vaccinated and have 1000 cases. So then you’ve got 800 cases coming from 2500 vaccinated employees.

One is newsworthy and concerning. The other is the vaccine working. Both have 80% infection rates among vaccinated employees.

We also need to know how many are actually sick. These articles rarely talk about that. Are there symptoms? If so is it just a runny nose? I do think this Delta variant is more problematic than the Alpha which is what the original vaccine numbers were based on but if it is keeping people from developing long covid, losing their sense of taste/smell then that's significant. If we had these tests in the days of polio etc, there might have been positive tests post vax then too

 

[LouderVol]

Well when there's a vaccine available for free that basically guarantees you won't be hospitalized...its just dumb.

Except not really.

We have heard all types of bs about the vaccine efficacy. A popular number is 25x fewer hospitalizations. We have had more than 30 million cases of Covid. Taking that number, you still have 1.2 million cases. We were freaking out before we hit 1 million.

And yes I know that is total case numbers, but I havent seen a cumulative total of hospitalizations to break down. With how people are freaking out, if they were consistent they would freak out about the breakthru hospitilizations too.

The fact that they generally dont says they care about compliance rather than actual safety.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

More gravel/dirt roads in NY than KY and AL combined.

Right... and they are mostly in the city. That's because public works, doesn't.

 

[RockyTop85]

Again if your using that argument then you have to realized that an illness that effects leas the 10% of you population most of which where eldery..is not a worriesome illness correct?

No, I don’t think that’s responsive to the statement I was making.

Simply stating the percentage of cases among vaccinated persons in a given population is meaningless without the context of rates of vaccination among the larger population because as the rate of vaccination approaches 100%, the rate of infection among vaccinated people will also approach 100%.

I don’t know how to say it more clearly than that. It’s not really an argument, it’s just statistics.

 

[whodeycin85]

No, I don’t think that’s responsive to the statement I was making.

Simply stating the percentage of cases among vaccinated persons in a given population is meaningless without the context of rates of vaccination among the larger population because as the rate of vaccination approaches 100%, the rate of infection among vaccinated people will also approach 100%.

I don’t know how to say it more clearly than that. It’s not really an argument, it’s just statistics.

We are not focused on the whole population...its a narrowed focus on those effected....if 80% of those infected are vaxed it calls in to question the effectiveness of the vax...regardless of how many vaxed as a whole...again if your looking at that to prove vax effectiveness then i contest no vax was needed as less then 10% of our population was effected by Covid...H1N1 effected 2x Covid before they stopped counting...did we respond the same way??? NO because the % effected wasnt relevent enough...

 

[bamawriter]

We are not focused on the whole population...its a narrowed focus on those effected....if 80% of those infected are vaxed it calls in to question the effectiveness of the vax...regardless of how many vaxed as a whole...again if your looking at that to prove vax effectiveness then i contest no vax was needed as less then 10% of our population was effected by Covid...H1N1 effected 2x Covid before they stopped counting...did we respond the same way??? NO because the % effected wasnt relevent enough...

Right. You're intentionally narrowing your focus to make a point that cannot be supported by the totality of the relevant data.

 

[LouderVol]

No, I don’t think that’s responsive to the statement I was making.

Simply stating the percentage of cases among vaccinated persons in a given population is meaningless without the context of rates of vaccination among the larger population because as the rate of vaccination approaches 100%, the rate of infection among vaccinated people will also approach 100%.

I don’t know how to say it more clearly than that. It’s not really an argument, it’s just statistics.

Stastics that have been played with this entire time to push vaccines. But now that it gets turned around you suddenly care?

We have been seeing it for more than a year. Cases increased 200%. But they dont tell you that's from 2 to 4.

ICUs beds nearly all full. But they dont give you historic norms or even break down what percentage is Covid related.

They tell us stuff is bad, and hope we dont check behind the curtain, before submitting to the vax.

Stastics has been used as a weapon this entire time. You either need to admit to the fear porn, now pushed by both sides, as intellectually dishonest; or accept the use of stats that you dont agree with.

 

[LouderVol]

Right. You're intentionally narrowing your focus to make a point that cannot be supported by the totality of the relevant data.

As the so called branch covidians have done for more than a year.

 

[bamawriter]

As the so called branch covidians have done for more than a year.

I agree with that. Both sides need to stop torturing the stats in order to get the confession they'd like.

 

[whodeycin85]

Right. You're intentionally narrowing your focus to make a point that cannot be supported by the totality of the relevant data.

Is that not how covid has been viewed??? We narrowed in on 36 million ignoring the other 250 plus millions cuz it didnt meet the fear porn...we made anyone no infected irrelevant from day 1...so the focus has been on those infected...

 

[LouderVol]

I agree with that. Both sides need to stop torturing the stats in order to get the confession they'd like.

And you, and Rocky, have only expressed displeasure with one side. without it being drug out of you.

Most people considered anti-vaxxers on this board are because they have been pointing to this problem for a year now.

 

[RockyTop85]

if 80% of those infected are vaxed it calls in to question the effectiveness of the vax...regardless of how many vaxed as a whole..

This is a factually incorrect statement.

 

[bamawriter]

And you, and Rocky, have only expressed displeasure with one side. without it being drug out of you.

Most people considered anti-vaxxers on this board are because they have been pointing to this problem for a year now.

I'm not expressing displeasure with anything. I like to utilize the totality of the statistics. If that comes off as "expressing displeasure," then I would suggest that says more about you than it does about me.

 

[whodeycin85]

This is a factually incorrect statement.

How...if 80% of infected people are vaxed..how does prove the vax is effective...if you go with population argue...Ill respond that 250 plus million non infected prove the vax is not needed...10% of the population infected doesnt require a vax

 

[RockyTop85]

How...if 80% of infected people are vaxed..how does prove the vax is effective...if you go with population argue...Ill respond that 250 plus million non infected prove the vax is not needed...10% of the population infected doesnt require a vax

You have a hypothetical group of 1000 people. 998 of them are vaccinated. There are 10 outbreak cases. 80% of the outbreak cases are among vaccinated people. You still concerned?

 

[bamawriter]

How...if 80% of infected people are vaxed..how does prove the vax is effective...if you go with population argue...Ill respond that 250 plus million non infected prove the vax is not needed...10% of the population infected doesnt require a vax

You: The shows a problem with the vaccine.
Disagreeing Poster: You can't actually say that without knowing how many were vaccinated.
You: Yes I can.
Disagreeing Poster: You can't, because the more people that are vaccinated, the higher the percentage of cases will come from the vaccinated population.
You: None of it matters because Covid isn't a big deal.

You refuse to address the issue with the case you're making. Instead of trying to do so, you jump to Covid as a whole. But you can't say that Covid as a whole isn't a problem while also saying that cases amongst the vaccinated are.

 

[ENGRVOL]

What % of the staff is vaccinated?
How many employees vs. how many confirmed cases?

You need those numbers for that statement to have any meaning. They could have 10,000 employees, 99% of whom are vaccinated, and only 70 cases. (So 14% of unvaccinated employees have cases while only .6% of unvaccinated people.

Or they could have 25% of employees vaccinated and have 1000 cases. So then you’ve got 800 cases coming from 2500 vaccinated employees.

One is newsworthy and concerning. The other is the vaccine working. Both have 80% infection rates among vaccinated employees.

Exactly you need to know what percentage of staff are vaccinated overall. Given vaccination rate well above 80% in San Fran and that this zuckerberg hospital requires some of its frontline workers to be vaccinated would suspect a vaccination rate well above 90% if not much higher. If 90% of staff are vaccinated then that comes out to around a 58% vaccine efficacy which is concerning and if 99% vaccinated that would be 96% vaccine efficacy similar to what we saw in the original moderna and Pfizer phase 3 data. And this is just to prevent symptomatic illness and would suspect much higher to prevent severe disease.