Vaccine or not?

#13,976
#13,976
VolStrom said:
Just curious what does "age adjusted" mean and why does this chart just include CA, CO, CT, GA, MD, MI, MN, NM, NY, OH, OR, TN and UT?
ETA: and the date is January through July.
Click to expand...
Also depending on how they break down that 100k number it's going to slant things pretty hard.

Is that total population divided by vax status? So for every 100k unvaxxed 500 are going to the hospital? Or is it for every total 100k 500 unvaxxed are going to the hospital.

The math changes real fast depending on when you start dividing.

It's really strange they are adding the rates up. Usually you dont see that. Why do they want a cumulative total of the rates? What does that actually tell you?

If it was 1% for 100 days, they would say 100% at the end. But that wouldnt mean that at the end 100% were in the hospital, it technically wouldnt even mean that 100% had even been to the hospital.

Depending on how they did the math they could be double/tripple/Xfinity times counting the same patient.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ButchPlz and SpaceCoastVol
#13,977
#13,977
LouderVol said:
Also depending on how they break down that 100k number it's going to slant things pretty hard.

Is that total population divided by vax status? So for every 100k unvaxxed 500 are going to the hospital? Or is it for every total 100k 500 unvaxxed are going to the hospital.

The math changes real fast depending on when you start dividing.

It's really strange they are adding the rates up. Usually you dont see that. Why do they want a cumulative total of the rates? What does that actually tell you?

If it was 1% for 100 days, they would say 100% at the end. But that wouldnt mean that at the end 100% were in the hospital, it technically wouldnt even mean that 100% had even been to the hospital.

Depending on how they did the math they could be double/tripple/Xfinity times counting the same patient.
Click to expand...
Lefty is good at counting people multiple times. Especially if it gets them to a goal they desire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol
#13,979
#13,979
VolStrom said:
Just curious what does "age adjusted" mean and why does this chart just include CA, CO, CT, GA, MD, MI, MN, NM, NY, OH, OR, TN and UT?
ETA: and the date is January through July.
Click to expand...

Perhaps that all the reliable data they had? Either way, it paints a pretty clear picture.
 
#13,981
#13,981
vols4sure said:
Its astonishing that you don't see the problem of that study not breaking down the hospitalizations down by age instead of lumping them all into one giant 16+ category. There were only 25k unvaccinated cases for people under 50. Why not tell us how many of those were hospitalized (if they are giving us this information i don't see it)?

You are also forgetting that the vast majority of older people are vaccinated. They are not the ones this study was trying to push because they are already vaccinated. They are trying to push younger people because they are the ones that have vaccine hesitancy and make up a larger portion of the population. Hard not to be a conspiracy theorist as reducing hesitancy in the younger age brackets is also where Pfizer and Moderna will increase their profits more significantly.
Click to expand...

LOL, you conspiracy theorists are nutty.

Your facebook memes, OAN and Newsmax news are all correct - the rest of the rational world is wrong. Clearly, the CDC along with EVERY other scientific outlet across the globe to push the nano-bot laden vaccines into our babies.
 
#13,984
#13,984
C-south said:
And that’s extrapolated of an already minuscule number.
Click to expand...

Would you say it's smaller than 4 in a million?

That's the number @Rasputin_Vol fear mongering article about AstraZenacas blood clots sees.

.0004% of vaccinated people experienced blood clots and you guys lose your minds. 30% more unvaccinated wind up in the hospital - well... "wElL ThATs jUSt a MIniScuLE NuMbER!"
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen and BigOrangeMojo
#13,987
#13,987
Septic said:
Would you say it's smaller than than 4 in a million?

That's the number @Rasputin_Vol fear mongering article about AstraZenacas blood clots sees.

.0004% of vaccinated people experienced blood clots and you guys lose your minds. 30% more unvaccinated wind up in the hospital - well... "wElL ThATs jUSt a MIniScuLE NuMbER!"
Click to expand...
There is a difference. When you mandate vaccines, you force people into taking a risk, no matter how minuscule, that they may not want to take. The people that voluntarily took the jab before the mandates had free will to make their own decisions and assess the risk. That option should be made available to everyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol and ButchPlz
#13,988
#13,988
#13,989
#13,989
Rasputin_Vol said:
There is a difference. When you mandate vaccines, you force people into taking a risk, no matter how minuscule, that they may not want to take. The people that voluntarily took the jab before the mandates had free will to make their own decisions and assess the risk. That option should be made available to everyone.
Click to expand...

Your issues with the vaccines began long before they were mandated.

Aside from a dozen or so vaccines haven been mandated for years, which you make excuses for - your argument holds no water. The moving target you place on the "safety" profile may never be achieved in a dozen lifetimes. No amount of time will satisfy you.

On a scale of one to January 6th, you're butthurt has been off the charts - rooted in supposition and whatifs'.

Heck, you're still floating the fear mongering articles hoping to convince someone (probably yourself). You'd have to be deaf, dumb and blind to to have not realized that the benefits outweigh the risk at this point.
 
Last edited:
#13,991
#13,991
Septic said:
You'd have to be deaf, dumb and blind to to have realized that the good outweighs the risk at this point.
Click to expand...
I would say at this point it is very marginal. I'm not going to say there is no benefit, bit the risks of getting the vaccine and possibly still getting COVID outweigh the risk of just getting COVID by itself.

I like my odds without the vaccine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol and ButchPlz
#13,992
#13,992
Septic said:
.00012%

But I see no reference to "56" in that article. I'm afraid that article does nothing to support what we now know to be a safe and effective covid vaccine.
Click to expand...
It's common knowledge by now that there were about 56 deaths related to that 1976 rollout before they finally called it off.
 
#13,993
#13,993
Rasputin_Vol said:
I would say at this point it is very marginal. I'm not going to say there is no benefit, bit the risks of getting the vaccine and possibly still getting COVID outweigh the risk of just getting COVID by itself.

I like my odds without the vaccine.
Click to expand...

LOL, the benefits of the vaccine is "very marginal."

Gotcha.

I like my odds of not being shot up in a school either. But I can see the benefit of not sending guns to elementary school in little Johnny's lunch box too.
 
#13,996
#13,996
FLVOL_79 said:
Sending anything over there is a waste. Should just set it on fire or flush it down the toilet. I mean ffs we still have people going there to show people how to dig wells and farm...
Click to expand...

Haven’t the African countries been cancelling orders anyway because no one wants to take the vaccine? Thought I read that recently.
 
#13,997
#13,997
Rasputin_Vol said:
It's common knowledge by now that there were about 56 deaths related to that 1976 rollout before they finally called it off.
Click to expand...

For something that is common knowledge, I can't find anything to support your claim.

found an article that references an "estimated" 32 but it goes on to say there's nothing to support that figure either.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
#13,998
#13,998
Septic said:
LOL, the benefits of the vaccine is "very marginal."

Gotcha.

I like my odds of not being shot up in a school either. But I can see the benefit of not sending guns to elementary school in little Johnny's lunch box too.
Click to expand...
So to be clear, you are comparing the odds of giving a loaded gun to a school kid with the odds of survival for the unvaccinated?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top