Covid: the shape of things to come

[ReiHamono]

Peer-reviewed

“ The positive correlation between mask usage and cases was not statistically significant (rho = 0.136, p = 0.436), while the correlation between mask usage and deaths was positive and significant (rho = 0.351, p = 0.039).”

“ The findings presented in this short communication suggest that countries with high levels of mask compliance did not perform better than those with low mask usage in the six-month period that encompassed the second European wave of COVID-19.”


https://www.cureus.com/articles/938...sk-compliance-and-covid-19-outcomes-in-europe

 

[captaincaed]

The overwhelming majority of people being highly affected by the virus are 65 years of age and older

Leaving about a quarter of deaths between 45 and 65. Which ain‘t that old.

Good study. Worth noting, no deaths from myocarditis in your study, for those under 40, some deaths above 40. Getting old sucks.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35442390/
Also, you’ve compared myocarditis as an outcome of a vaccine to death as an outcome from a disease. Not really an apples to apples comparison. Yes, it’s a real and serious complication. There was a stronger ethical argument for vaccines when they reduced transmission of the ancestral variant, which isn’t really true now. Now it’s more about slowing variant mutation.

Wearing a mask still prevents spread from infected to susceptible people. Wearing pants prevents the spread of feces on chairs.

Here’s a paper I like for anyone curious about estimated infection fatality ratio by age group, one year increments (page 7).

edit: link formats wonky, but goes to a real article, and totally not to a page where you can donate to my Swiss bank account.

DEFINE_ME

 

[MarcelNL]

good attempt at a decent article in a real journal!

one issue; wearing a mask does not mean people comply with mask hygiene, which in itself points at another and bigger issue....motivation and compliance.
Seeing folks wear masks on their chin, wearing it where the chance of being caught is highest, wearing it for weeks in a row without desinfecting etc etc We have a law against smoking in bars for some years now and there are still places where around 4AM the curtains are being closed and the ashtrays appear.
Ultimately masks in the way they are worn by the general public are not the saviour, yet they can delay the period until you contract the disease by other means and can be a factor to slow down disease spread...

 

[MarcelNL]

https://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/all-electric/i4/gran-coupe/electric-bmw-m.html
not cheap, though still a fair bit less than the current m4.

you are paying a 1200 lb weight penalty. on the other hand, it is down fairly low, and the distribution is pretty good. plus you get an actual functional car that doesn't try to reinvent every possible interface, is built well, has a good warranty, a real dealer network, etc.

a tiny percentage of people are interested in actual sports cars. those can stay ICE/hybrid for years. I dont see why commuter car owners could/should/would care how the car gets them from home to work, the grocery store, etc.

nice car! I somehow missed it, thanks for pointing at it...I got stuck looking at the Polestar 2 since I HATE SUV's and these other three letter word cars that need a rattle can of spray dirt to look the part. Will do some research, 640hp is not too shabby either One major drawback is that BMW got a 'hausverbot' by the missus...the brand status as 'proletarian car' does not work for her...(I do not mind, as long as a car has enough 'überholprestige' to get going on the Autobahn)

To the Kona, it may be a one off but a mate of me has one, and got a new drive train after 30K (km)

 

[user 16756]

good attempt at a decent article in a real journal!

one issue; wearing a mask does not mean people comply with mask hygiene, which in itself points at another and bigger issue....motivation and compliance.
Seeing folks wear masks on their chin, wearing it where the chance of being caught is highest, wearing it for weeks in a row without desinfecting etc etc We have a law against smoking in bars for some years now and there are still places where around 4AM the curtains are being closed and the ashtrays appear.
Ultimately masks in the way they are worn by the general public are not the saviour, yet they can delay the period until you contract the disease by other means and can be a factor to slow down disease spread...

finding a significant positive correlation between mask compliance percentages and covid deaths when there is literally no mechanism for this to be possible suggests that there is probably a greater component to covid infection rates that is bulldozing masks.

I will agree that for once Eric has posted something that isnt most easily described as "psycho ****" and it was a good read.

as they stated in their own meta-analysis, there is conflicting evidence about whether masks have a positive impact depending on exactly how and what you measure. we have to think carefully though, because we know mechanically that masks do work, and ask what may result in that not being reflected in practice.

what's interesting here is how masks have become this whole thing. they were always supposed to be part of a suite of protections and a bit of a "something we can do as we wait for effective vaccines". but there are two camps here with hugely asymmetrical motivations. on one side is people who want less people to die from the disease and are willing to put up with some inconvenience. the other is politically motivated, who somehow view doing literally anything to try and help your neighbors not die as "oppression", etc.

and who ofc were the ones who could work to sabotage the whole effort by not complying then after the fact point and say "see we told you so".

 

[ReiHamono]

“In August of 2021, about 18.9% of COVID-19 deaths occurred among the vaccinated. Six months later, in February 2022, that proportional percent of deaths had increased to more than 40%.”

“More than 90% of seniors have been fully vaccinated, but a third of them have yet to receive their first booster shot. Even with overall high vaccination rates in older populations, in recent months, during the omicron surge, 73% of deaths have been among those 65 and older.”

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/break...ng-proportion-died-covid-19/story?id=84627182

 

[user 16756]

“In August of 2021, about 18.9% of COVID-19 deaths occurred among the vaccinated. Six months later, in February 2022, that proportional percent of deaths had increased to more than 40%.”

“More than 90% of seniors have been fully vaccinated, but a third of them have yet to receive their first booster shot. Even with overall high vaccination rates in older populations, in recent months, during the omicron surge, 73% of deaths have been among those 65 and older.”

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/break...ng-proportion-died-covid-19/story?id=84627182
View attachment 179179

from the same article you just posted:

In February, unvaccinated adults were 10 times more likely to die of COVID-19 compared to vaccinated individuals and five times more likely to require hospitalization, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

congratulations. I never thought it would be you, of all people, who provided such categorical evidence that covid vaccines are effective.

everyone, please join me in thanking Eric. if even our biggest skeptic finally understands how effective vaccines are, we should applaud it!

 

[Michi]

In order to get a handle on the effectiveness of vaccines in preventing death, quoting percentages or absolute numbers is meaningless. To get an accurate picture, the per-capita rates of death of vaccinated and unvaccinated people need to be compared. As more and more people get vaccinated over time, their percentage of total fatalities increases too, because the vaccines are not perfect and there are more and more vaccinated targets.

To drive the point home, if 100% of people were vaccinated, 100% of fatalities would be among the vaccinated. That doesn't mean the vaccines don't work, only that everyone is vaccinated.

 

[gregfisk]

In order to get a handle on the effectiveness of vaccines in preventing death, quoting percentages or absolute numbers I meaningless. To get an accurate picture, the per-capita rates of death of vaccinated and unvaccinated people need to be compared. As more and more people get vaccinated over time, their percentage of total fatalities increases too, because the vaccines are not perfect and there are more and more vaccinated targets.

To drive the point home, if 100% of people were vaccinated, 100% of fatalities would be among the vaccinated. That doesn't mean the vaccines don't work, only that everyone is vaccinated.

This is absolutely true. SO, why would someone constantly and consistently try to pick through the data to downplay the positive life saving effects of the vaccines? Eric, this question is for you. Why when you are presented with information from your own posted article do you never respond and only post more obviously biased one sided opinions??? What do you possibly gain from posting partial truths and debunked articles? It just blows me away that people actually believe some of this stuff. No, the vaccines don’t keep you from getting or spreading the virus and that’s too bad. The fact that we have them at all is astonishing in such a short amount of time. But they do keep people from dying and getting critically ill from Covid. That is a fact that can no longer be denied.

 

[daveb]

o drive the point home, if 100% of people were vaccinated, 100% of fatalities would be among the vaccinated.

Conversely, when 0% of people were vaccinated, 100% of fatalities were among the unvaccinated. The vaccinated percentages have indeed changed and the fatalities group has changed as well. Not sure there's a causal relationship.

And the only thing masks have changed is to make me prettier.....

 

[Michi]

Conversely, when 0% of people were vaccinated, 100% of fatalities were among the unvaccinated. The vaccinated percentages have indeed changed and the fatalities group has changed as well. Not sure there's a causal relationship.

Suppose we look at fatalities among vaccinated people, and there are x deaths per 100,000. And, for unvaccinated people, suppose y deaths per 100,000. If x and y differ, and the difference is statistically significant, then we can start to think about why that might be. It could be due to being vaccinated or unvaccinated, or it could be due to other factors. (Epidemiologists are pretty good at teasing out the significant variables and eliminating sampling errors.)

All I'm pointing out here is that it is meaningless to state that "40% of deaths are among vaccinated". Because that says absolutely nothing other than "some people die despite vaccination".

If we want to know if vaccination reduces fatalities, we need to look at both vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts, and we need to look at per-capita fatalities of the overall cohorts, not just of those people who end up in hospital, otherwise it is an apples and oranges comparison.

 

[MarcelNL]

Indeed and that data (per capita fatalities) on vaccinated vs unvaccinated are widely available.
for example here;
https://ourworldindata.org/covid-deaths-by-vaccination

I dare say there is clear evidence that vaccination works, and booster(s) too.

Differences in general health of populations and health care access/system may be at least partial contributors to the large difference between countries.

 

[Michi]

I just listened to an NPR story on the way home in my car. It reports on a study by researchers at Brown University and Microsoft AI. NPR report that, of the 641,000 people who died after vaccines became available in the US, nearly 319,000 would still be alive if they had taken the vaccine.

So much for vaccines not working…

 

[daveb]

So......

You ridicule Eric³ for citing something from Epoch Times - and then you cite NPR?

SMH

Do you spell hypocrisy the same way we do?

 

[MarcelNL]

The citation appears to be from Brown Uni and M

study by researchers at Brown University and Microsoft

As long as NPR reports the study that this data is from in a factual and corrrect way and the study is solid what's the problem? Or is listening to NPR the issue? I'm trying to understand what the issue is?

Did you read the article and is there an issue with it?

 

[user 16756]

So......

You ridicule Eric³ for citing something from Epoch Times - and then you cite NPR?

SMH

Do you spell hypocrisy the same way we do?

absolute

level post

 

[ReiHamono]

Fauci and FDA Say Americans Should Treat COVID-19 Like the Flu

“Covid will likely circulate globally for the foreseeable future, taking its place alongside other common respiratory viruses such as influenza.”

It’s very amazing that the rhetoric has changed so dramatically all of a sudden. It’s as if they are trying to quickly sweep it all under the rug.

The next question I have is whether or not the vaccines are actually effective, the most recent data shows that they are not and certainly were never ever 95% effective as originally claimed.

On What Basis Did Pfizer Claim 95%?

“According to a study by Jaafar et al., the authors found that when running PCR tests with 35 cycles or more – the accuracy dropped to 3%, meaning up to 97 % of positive results could be false positives.”

https://brownstone.org/articles/on-what-basis-did-pfizer-claim-95/
While around 20 cycles appears to be most accurate, anything greater especially 35 cycles, should have never of been used in the first place.

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/72/11/e921/5912603?login=false
Finally are vaccines even safe?

FDA restricts J&J’s COVID-19 vaccine due to blood clot risk

https://apnews.com/article/covid-science-business-health-11b4f26de57da9b1b62669c1b2394ab3
We’ve seen many Nordic countries coming to the same conclusions

FOI reveals Pfizer and Medicine Regulators hid the dangers of Covid-19 Vaccination during Pregnancy because Study found it increases risk of Birth Defects & Infertility

“According to the Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC)) Vaccine Adverse Event Database (VAERS), as of 22nd April 2022, a total of 4,113 foetal deaths have been reported as adverse reactions to the Covid-19 injections, 3,209 of which were reported against the Pfizer injection.”

All of which may be attributed to the fact that these vaccinations cause an abundance of micro blood clots depending on the individual as mentioned in the previous studies.

CDC Investigating 109 Mysterious Hepatitis Cases In Children, Including 5 Deaths

Medicine Regulators believe attenuated viruses in AstraZeneca & Janssen COVID Vaccines are to blame for rise in deadly Hepatitis among Children

The World Health Organization recently issued a ‘global alert’ about a new form of severe hepatitis affecting children.

“The current publicised, but not watertight theory is that this is due to an adenovirus. But not just any adenovirus. Evidence suggests that Medicine Regulators around the world believe it is due to an “attenuated” adenovirus variant in both the AstraZeneca and Janssen Covid-19 vaccines”

This coincides with the CDCs precautions against the J&J vaccination which unlike the mRNA vaccinations instead uses adenovirus.

Remember that these children never ever needed a covid vaccination as they were not at any real risk in the first place

FDA Contraindicates Janssen COVID Vaccine for People With Previous Thrombosis With Thrombocytopenia

“Cases of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia following administration of the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine have been reported in males and females 18 years of age and older. The highest reporting rate of approximately one case per 100,000 doses administered in females 30-49 years of age. Overall, the FDA said approximately 1 out of 7 cases has been fatal.”

https://www.dicardiology.com/conten...e-people-previous-thrombosis-thrombocytopenia

“Both the J&J and AstraZeneca Covid-19 injections are viral vector gene therapies. Both allegedly work by doing the following –

First, the DNA instructions to create the SARS-CoV-2 antigen (spike protein; not the full SARS-CoV-2 virus) are inserted into a modified virus (adenovirus).

Then after the “vaccine” is injected into an individual, the viral vector delivers the spike protein DNA instructions to cells resulting in large amounts of the spike protein antigen.”

https://gut.bmj.com/content/48/5/733
https://expose-news.com/2022/05/07/...en/?cmid=7ea5377a-504b-48d0-b0c4-96756003e4d4

 

[MarcelNL]

really.....Again? Have you been smoking stuff?

Nobody is downplaying Covid, it's just that it is clear it won't go away and will revisit us regularly like the flu.

The BS institute has choses their name well, you better read up on HOW a drug (and a vaccine) gets approved, not just in the US but in quite a few countries. You can look up all the data, and even do your own statistical analysis, or trust that the math is checked and found to be OK since FDA does their own stats analysys to verify that of the company submitting data, further; a panel of experts in this field verified methodology and recommended approval and the basis for that was NOT 8 cases.

I guess you posted part of a package insert, there is no reference...again, it seems as package inserts should come with their own package insert on how to read the information.

Pregnant mothers usually are EXCLUDED from ANY study, for obvious reasons, risk assessment is usually done via animal experiments. There is nothing to hide, there usually is no data. that is why the statement about insufficient data is found in most package inserts.

If there is data from study participants (not in a study designed around pregnancy) that happen to have been or become pregnant during their participation in a study the outcome of their pregnancy may be reported but always on a voluntary basis...so by mothers if they choose to...so missingness is expected. Full disclosure is provided for the outcome of cases with reported outcome, are you aware that pregnancies carry a risk and not all pregnancy outcomes are a healthy baby? Unless you do a statistical comparison of these data against a comparable group of mothers not in any study this is simply information, without such analysis which requires a dedicated study in pregnant mothers you cannot draw any conclusion other than perhaps picking up a flag to study things in more detail.

safety; what is unsafe is NOT getting vaccinated, I think that is a better way to put it than to project a side effect (sure it's potentially serious) for one of the vaccines and is associated with a specific sub population that is being excluded, and to add to the nonsensical concoction of points brought together; the J&J vaccine is an old school vaccine, quite different from the mRNA vaccines.

Lastly an mRNA vaccine is NOT Gene therapy.

 

[Michi]

You ridicule Eric³ for citing something from Epoch Times - and then you cite NPR?

I take it that you don't like NPR?

I linked to the original study and the piece NPR did on it because I like to quote my sources.

SMH

I don't understand. Do you think that the study can be no good because NPR reported on it, or do you see a problem with the study?

Do you spell hypocrisy the same way we do?

Do you spell "ad hominem" the same way I do?

 

[Michi]

This graphic is taken from the original study. It shows deaths in 2021 of vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts.

Or, in numbers, in 2021, per capita, for every vaccinated person who died of Covid, 47.62 unvaccinated persons died of Covid.

I guess the vaccine deniers will find a way to twist this into the opposite. People who died with Covid instead of of Covid, over-reporting of cases, under-reporting of cases, and so on…

It seems highly unlikely to me though that the sources of these numbers (CDC and New York Times) are out by a factor of 47, even though they inevitably will contain some errors.

 

[Luftmensch]

I take it that you don't like NPR?

My understanding of American media is basic... intermediate at best... that said, I suspect NPR is received in similar ways to the ABC.

[Edit: Great point of clarification from @Michi. See below... Australia has an ABC.... as does America]

 

[Michi]

My understanding of American media is basic... intermediate at best... that said, I suspect NPR is received in similar ways to the ABC.

Clarification for non-Australians, that is the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, not the American version.

 

[Luftmensch]

400hp is nice, my current car has 260

Sorry... this is totally inappropriate in this thread... But i just had to...

The GR Yaris from last year was pretty interesting. I only just found out about the GR Corolla (unveiled a month ago). If I had more money than sense... the GR Corolla looks practical with more 'fun' than any average person needs...

 

[gregfisk]

My understanding of American media is basic... intermediate at best... that said, I suspect NPR is received in similar ways to the ABC.

[Edit: Great point of clarification from @Michi. See below... Australia has an ABC.... as does America]

NPR prides itself in being a public funded neutral broadcaster and is considered fairly neutral by normal standards. Of course the right thinks it’s liberal.

 

[user 16756]

NPR prides itself in being a public funded neutral broadcaster and is considered fairly neutral by normal standards. Of course the right thinks it’s liberal.

I think dave should tell us what source(s) he thinks are right in the middle. neither conservative nor liberal enough to qualify as biased.

we need a baseline so we can understand why he thinks that NPR is even remotely comparable to the epoch times (which is still one of the most laughable things Ive heard anyone say on this forum)

 

[mpier]

Can we just close this thread altogether, it’s so annoying, it’s just insults and garbage at this point. You all have beaten the horse to death and sent it to the glue factory.

 

[Chicagohawkie]

Can we just close this thread altogether, it’s so annoying, it’s just insults and garbage at this point. You all have beaten the horse to death and sent it to the glue factory.

Smartest guy in the room.

 

[Luftmensch]

NPR prides itself in being a public funded neutral broadcaster and is considered fairly neutral by normal standards. Of course the right thinks it’s liberal.

Exactly the same with the ABC here (Australia).... which is why I made the remark. I drew this equivalence in response to @Michi - though I suspect he already knew . This is also why I didnt think to disambiguate 'ABC'. He would have understood which ABC I meant!

The ABC (or 'Aunty'... like the BBC) is also a high-quality/reliable source of news. It covers TV, radio and 'print' (internet). They have some real gems. It is constantly battling funding cuts and accusations of progressive bias. Conservative governments can be wary of the ABC and Murdoch hates her (government run competition).

 

[user 16756]

Can we just close this thread altogether, it’s so annoying, it’s just insults and garbage at this point. You all have beaten the horse to death and sent it to the glue factory.

nope

 

[ian]

Eric³

Strong use of exponents.

Anyone seen the 1997 movie Cube? It made me the man I am today.