Getting tough with the anti-vaxxers

Marty Gingras

Mid-range Anarchist
Just the scientific method and evidence

The old man needs to make a YouTube living, so he is being (as usual) dramatic. Here's the paper he's talking about:


The authors say their findings (vaccine risk somewhat outweighs vaccine benefit) may be wrong but they need more of the information held by the FDA and vaccine companies to know for sure. Clearly, they should be given access to the data.

Good to see (as has always been the case) the scientific method being applied and unfolding.
 

Steam Flyer

Sophisticated Yet Humble
47,972
11,667
Eastern NC
The old man needs to make a YouTube living, so he is being (as usual) dramatic. Here's the paper he's talking about:


The authors say their findings (vaccine risk somewhat outweighs vaccine benefit) may be wrong but they need more of the information held by the FDA and vaccine companies to know for sure. Clearly, they should be given access to the data.

Good to see (as has always been the case) the scientific method being applied and unfolding.

I think it would be a good idea to make that data more widely available, but the same experiment is playing out in public, in full view. Look at the public health situation in countries with a ~90% vax rate (some are higher), and compare to the situation in the USA with ~60%
 

Marty Gingras

Mid-range Anarchist
I think it would be a good idea to make that data more widely available, but the same experiment is playing out in public, in full view. Look at the public health situation in countries with a ~90% vax rate (some are higher), and compare to the situation in the USA with ~60%
For sure.

The authors lightly touched on the fact that they were looking at small clinical trials even though billions of doses have been administered. They said (basically) the trials were randomized and that's the gold standard, so it makes sense to look at them closely. That's true of course, but folks are also looking at the (more important, IMHO) big picture.
 

Steam Flyer

Sophisticated Yet Humble
47,972
11,667
Eastern NC
I think it would be a good idea to make that data more widely available, but the same experiment is playing out in public, in full view. Look at the public health situation in countries with a ~90% vax rate (some are higher), and compare to the situation in the USA with ~60%
For sure.

The authors lightly touched on the fact that they were looking at small clinical trials even though billions of doses have been administered. They said (basically) the trials were randomized and that's the gold standard, so it makes sense to look at them closely. That's true of course, but folks are also looking at the (more important, IMHO) big picture.

I did not bother with anti-vax fuckhead's video, no patience for that bullshit these days. Fuck 'em, they can all move to red states and die of the next plague (although this one is not done with us yet).

It is certainly worth gathering specific data on individuals with specific conditions... diabetes, for example... but just fishing for "proof" that the vaccines is BAD!! is just catering to more RWNJ bullshit. Isn't just making it up good enough?
 

veni vidi vici

Omne quod audimus est opinio, non res. Omnia videm
8,752
2,078
None of the “vaccines “
Prevent transmission or contracting the Coronavirus
99.8% survival rate for those that come down with the Coronavirus
Of those that died or with severe illness were over the life expectancy age and or had comorbidity
 

Marty Gingras

Mid-range Anarchist
None of the vaccines
FTFY
Prevent transmission or contracting the Coronavirus
It's semantics, but one gets infected with a virus (could be impactful or not) but contracts COVID-19.
99.8% survival rate for those that come down with the Coronavirus
Do you mean SARS-CoV-2? If so, I doubt that. Even if so, what's 0.2% of 7.837 billion?
Of those that died or with severe illness were over the life expectancy age and or had comorbidity
You didn't finish your thought.
 

veni vidi vici

Omne quod audimus est opinio, non res. Omnia videm
8,752
2,078
FTFY

It's semantics, but one gets infected with a virus (could be impactful or not) but contracts COVID-19.

Do you mean SARS-CoV-2? If so, I doubt that. Even if so, what's 0.2% of 7.837 billion?

You didn't finish your thought.
Very few died or contracted SARS-CoV-2
In China during the first year and before the vaccine
 

veni vidi vici

Omne quod audimus est opinio, non res. Omnia videm
8,752
2,078
That remains to be seen doesn’t it? Depends on which strain goes rampant. I’m hearing mostly omicron, which isn’t nearly as nasty as the original strain. Crossing fingers, of course, that they don’t develop some new shitty strain.
Was that a slip ?
Or have you always believed it was a lab leak?
.
 


Latest posts





Top