Would you take a Coronavirus Vaccine

[britechguy]

Any person who claims to be a man of science, and working in high tech ought to qualify, should be able to take in data that disproves a scientific theory. That’s part of the scientific method.

Indeed. But in most cases that data has to be either incontrovertible at the outset, or a preponderance of replicated results.

I'm not saying you're saying anything else, just pointing that out. There's a reason that even the very best research and at the end of a very long march routinely includes, "Further research is necessary," as a pro-forma statement in studies. If something isn't axiomatic, there's always the possibility, however remote, that new information could come to light to counter it.

But the quacks out there will take single study examples and try to extrapolate from them saying they invalidate decades to centuries of existing data. The infamous, and debunked, initial study that attempted to link autism spectrum disorder to vaccines being a perfect example. The number of people still trying to "run that ball" is just jaw-dropping.

 

[gadgetfixup]

Sorry I got my States mixed up, the facts remain the same but the recent outbreak was in Massachusetts, not Rhode Island. CDC is the source.

"Among the 469 cases in Massachusetts residents, 346 (74%) occurred in persons who were fully vaccinated; of these, 301 (87%) were male, with a median age of 42 years."

No reason to believe the infection rate of vaccinated individuals is any different in any other location. Daily Mail and Independent in the UK both cite Covid hospitalization among vaccinated about 50%. It should be clear the vaccine isn't protecting anyone from contracting and spreading Covid at this point. The positive news is while delta is spreading exponentially as most delta variants do, if history is correct it will fall off the cliff in a few weeks.

Outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 Infections, including COVID-19 ...

This report describes COVID-19 outbreaks associated with ...

www.cdc.gov

 

[nlinecomputers]

So do you carry a gun to protect me and my family? I can't believe how opinionated and insulting your post is in light that 74% of C-19 cases hospitalized in Massachusetts recently were fully vaccinated, patients. Media in the UK report about half of the hospitalized patients with C-19 were fully vaccinated. The CDC says the infected were delta variants which they found much more contagious than C-19, as contagious as the chickenpox and common cold. The CDC went on to say vaccinated people carrying delta are likely to infect 7-8 other people. It isn't known if those that have the C-19 antibodies will be protected from vaccinated people spreading delta, most signal probably not. So thank you vaccinated people for endangering me, someone that had C-19 and has C-19 antibodies with delta. You didn't make the world a safer place, you made it as dangerous and some say more dangerous. My age group has a 99.4% survival rate. I'm not obese, don't have hypertension nor diabetes, my immune system has beat every virus for 60 years, keep your hyperbole and guilt to yourself. If you believe your Government and Big Pharma have your best interest in their decisions, you're already too far gone for reasonable discussion.

With respect you said hospitalized. The report doesn’t say hospitalized it doesn’t even say symptoms. Most of these people are asymptomatic, meaning infected and infectious, but otherwise not showing any symptoms or mild symptoms. You are exaggerating and misrepresenting the information because you didn’t properly read it. No doubt because someone else did the same and now you are just parroting it with out properly digesting the content.

 

[nlinecomputers]

Note that this surge in asymptomatic spread is why the CDC is now telling us vaccinated people to mask up again because we are much more likely to be “ typhoid Mary” spreading the virus to the unvaccinated, who are much more likely to be not asymptomatic. Because too many idiots are about who will not protect themselves WE have to be inconvenienced.

 

[gadgetfixup]

With respect you said hospitalized. The report doesn’t say hospitalized it doesn’t even say symptoms. Overall, 274 (79%) vaccinated patients with breakthrough infection were symptomatic. You are exaggerating and misrepresenting the information because you didn’t properly read it. No doubt because someone else did the same and now you are just parroting it with out properly digesting the content.

With respect, do you believe healthy people got tested? Do you believe all the reports from the UK are wrong? Do you believe when the CDC says the "war has changed" they meant nothing has changed? I've digested the content and only posted one CDC source.

"Overall, 274 (79%) vaccinated patients with breakthrough infection were symptomatic."

Are you the one to talk about who digested this information correctly?

Did you go read the "Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR)"? The same virus, the same vaccine as used in other Countries but only our Country has 99.5% unvaccinated patients in the hospitals, our vaccinated rarely end up in the hospital.... That's what you believe? Where we have less lockdowns, less mask enforcement yet better results? Or is your Government and media lying to you? I believe we have the same results as other Countries following the same prescription.

 

[britechguy]

With respect, do you believe healthy people got tested?

Seemingly healthy people have been being tested, in insufficient numbers I'll add, since the beginning. It's the only way to get a handle on the percentage of truly asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic ("I have the sniffles," for example) infections. There are now way more of those as breakthrough infections with the delta variant.

And, with respect, you are not digesting this information accurately. You're making multiple unsupported leaps based on it, and the initial "hospitalized" leap and the above quoted rhetorical question clearly indicate that. I congratulate you, sincerely, for turning to reliable source material, but you need to learn how to interpret it accurately.

 

[Sky-Knight]

...but you need to learn how to interpret it accurately.

Which needs furthered by pointing out, this process is NOT easy. That report has a ton of junk in it anyone without a medical background is going to confuse. Which is why anytime something like this comes up, I put it on Facebook and share it to those I know with medical backgrounds. Their conversation is all I need. But I only have that medical circle due to crap in this house I wouldn't wish on anyone. So if you do not have someone you trust that knows this stuff... it's hard. It's just plain hard.

I'm a network engineer / sysadmin / cloud engineer... not a doctor, or even a nurse. Even if I have more than a passing familiarity with needles.

 

[nlinecomputers]

With respect, do you believe healthy people got tested?

They do if contacted by the heath department because of contact tracing. I’ve been tested 3 times in the past year or so because of contact tracing. Never had COVID-19.

 

[nlinecomputers]

And, with respect, you are not digesting this information accurately. You're making multiple unsupported leaps based on it, and the initial "hospitalized" leap and the above quoted rhetorical question clearly indicate that. I congratulate you, sincerely, for turning to reliable source material, but you need to learn how to interpret it accurately

We all are to a point as if you read this document carefully it is about ONE set of events in one county. It doesn’t cover all the cases of COVID-19 in that county only those people who contact tracing found at those events. It’s a limited demographic.

 

[gadgetfixup]

Seemingly healthy people have been being tested, in insufficient numbers I'll add, since the beginning. It's the only way to get a handle on the percentage of truly asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic ("I have the sniffles," for example) infections. There are now way more of those as breakthrough infections with the delta variant.

And, with respect, you are not digesting this information accurately. You're making multiple unsupported leaps based on it, and the initial "hospitalized" leap and the above quoted rhetorical question clearly indicate that. I congratulate you, sincerely, for turning to reliable source material, but you need to learn how to interpret it accurately.

Can you show me in that article where the symptomatic victims only had sniffles and were only minimally infected with delta? I can't find it, I must have missed it.

Yes, I assumed they were tested at the hospital because that's where our COVID tests are administered but it could have been some other place I suppose. I pictured they were sick and went to the hospital, maybe they didn't, maybe their personal MDs test for Covid. Our hospital, "hospitalizes" you before they'll test you. You have to fill out the paperwork and check-in, it used to be by appointment only but I think you can register online. If you're a patient at a hospital are you hospitalized or not if they don't give you a bed? I don't know. Maybe you need a bed to be hospitalized.

 

[nlinecomputers]

You can get a COVID-19 test at Walgreens or most any other pharmacy. You can buy DIY kits at Walmart now.

 

[lan101]

@lan101 I have a trip to NY booked in Oct and I knew the shot would be required at this event.

Which one did you get?

 

[gadgetfixup]

You can get a COVID-19 test at Walgreens or most any other pharmacy. You can buy DIY kits at Walmart now.

Does the Walgreens or other pharmacy tests perform Genomic sequencing to identify Delta variants? Can they do RT-PCR tests to measure the threshold values? These sound like advance testing to me but I'm not a doctor.

The tests administered confirmed the threshold values of the vaccinated and unvaccinated were almost identical. Meaning both were infected with the same dosage of the virus. I'm not sure exactly what vaxxers believe this vaccine does but clearly, it doesn't even reduce the threshold values of the virus. They took samples from 127 vaccinated people and 84 unvaccinated people and the threshold value (level of infection) was almost identical (median = 22.77 and 21.54, respectively).

If we want to talk about how many ended up confined to a bed, there were 5 bed patients in this outbreak, 4 of them were fully vaccinated, one was unvaccinated. All survived.

BTW, the number is up to 900 now.

 

[britechguy]

Can you show me in that article where the symptomatic victims only had sniffles and were only minimally infected with delta? I can't find it, I must have missed it.

I said nothing, absolutely nothing, about the content of that article that was in reference to the point I was making. I didn't need to.

You stated, ". . .do you believe healthy people got tested?," as a rhetorical question with the clear intimation that you believed the answer to be, "No."

I countered with readily available information, and now we have a member giving his single anecdotal account, that seemingly healthy individuals have been a part of testing protocols since the very beginning, and gave some of those reasons. It is a fact that, throughout the course of the pandemic, part of the public health practice has been sampling seemingly uninfected people to learn more about asymptomatic or very minimally symptomatic infections. About this there is no question, and I don't need the article you mentioned to support it. You will find tons of information in CDC material that directly supports it.

Even the simple process of applying logic and reason dictates that seemingly uninfected people have to be tested, and in numbers, on a constant basis to know who's actually not infected versus who's infected and asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic. They can't pull this data out of thin air.

But, as @nlinecomputers has noted, and the experts have noted, this is not easy and the testing protocols that have been in place are still not sufficient to make entirely accurate extrapolations to the population as a whole. The sample sizes are too small, for starters. But working with what you've got, which is far better than just anecdotal evidence, is far better than wild speculation or acting like what we do know is insignificant.

 

[britechguy]

I'm not sure exactly what vaxxers believe this vaccine does

Exactly what the experts say it does:

1. Actually prevents infection in the vast majority of folks who get it.
2. Protects against severe forms of Covid-19 that require hospitalization in those who get breakthrough infections.
3. Greatly reduces the number of people who would have been acting as carriers, because they didn't get it.

It pretty much does what any other vaccine does. None are 100% protective, and none ever have been. But if they're good enough to stop wildfire-like spread, they're doing their job. And the data available, for months now, about differences in infection and hospitalization rates in high-vaccine-adoption areas versus low gives unquestionably clear evidence that it does the three things I listed above.

I have no idea why anyone has ever believed that every person who has ever gotten a vaccine for any given thing absolutely will be able to avoid contracting it. There's not a single study of a single vaccine in history that suggests this the norm. But when it comes to vaccines, "good enough" to stop the easy spread of highly communicable diseases is way more than "good enough."

 

[callthatgirl]

@lan101 Pfizer, the best one.

 

[nlinecomputers]

Does the Walgreens or other pharmacy tests perform Genomic sequencing to identify Delta variants? Can they do RT-PCR tests to measure the threshold values? These sound like advance testing to me but I'm not a doctor.

The tests administered confirmed the threshold values of the vaccinated and unvaccinated were almost identical. Meaning both were infected with the same dosage of the virus. I'm not sure exactly what vaxxers believe this vaccine does but clearly, it doesn't even reduce the threshold values of the virus. They took samples from 127 vaccinated people and 84 unvaccinated people and the threshold value (level of infection) was almost identical (median = 22.77 and 21.54, respectively).

If we want to talk about how many ended up confined to a bed, there were 5 bed patients in this outbreak, 4 of them were fully vaccinated, one was unvaccinated. All survived.

BTW, the number is up to 900 now.

Probably not. But of course as common sense tells you, if you test positive for COVID-19, that Walmart test isn’t going to be trusted by your doc and he will run his own tests and by law he’ll be required to report his results to the state which by law does do that sequencing.

 

[sapphirescales]

mRNA is a technology that dates back several decades and has been used in other vaccines before.

There has never been a successful mRNA vaccine used on humans outside of very restrictive trials until now. Traditional vaccine technologies have been around forever, in widespread use for almost a century. To suggest that an mRNA vaccine is just as safe is ridiculous and impossible to prove. Not enough time has passed. We won't know for certain for several decades at least. Until then, I'll stick with the traditional vaccines we do know the long term effects of. Then I'll switch over to mRNA, by which time I'm sure there will be a new technology that they'll try to convince everyone is safe without sufficient long-term studies.

Just because you injected someone with an mRNA vaccine and they didn't immediately keel over and die doesn't mean the vaccine is safe. By those standards, asbestos and carcinogenic compounds are "safe" too. The human track record when it comes to proving the long-term safety of new materials and technologies does NOT inspire confidence.

 

[gadgetfixup]

I have no idea why anyone has ever believed that every person who has ever gotten a vaccine for any given thing absolutely will be able to avoid contracting it.

74% of the fully vaccinated in this one sample got infected. You suggest your Government, the CDC and Big Pharma have no cards in play, no chips on the table and just concerned about your health and well-being. I remember when I was once so naive.

 

[gadgetfixup]

More than 12,000 (some report more than 50,000 in the USA), mostly healthy people have died directly from your "safe" vaccine. I guess that "if it only saves one life" nonsense was just rhetoric. 12,000 families buried a loved one that would still be here if they hadn't listened to the "experts". 99.6% survival rate wasn't reassuring enough and now all they have are pictures and memories because vaxxers convinced them the jab was safe. I wish all the vaxxers would spend time with those families and explain the "greater good" and how this isn't all about money.