Coronavirus Outbreak

[Bootstrap]

Nett, I don't care why you aren't providing the analysis you claim to have done. If you make a scientific claim, then point to a link that disagrees with your claim, that's deceitful. Maybe you did not read the article. Maybe you are not capable of reading the article. Maybe you are being intentionally deceptive.

When someone else points out the fact that the article disagrees with you, you double down by saying you did not rely on the abstract or summary, but you have done your own analysis, but you don't want to show that analysis. Even if you have done your own analysis, it is misleading to point to an article as though it supports your claims if the authors of that article clearly do not. And if you simply got it wrong, a simple apology will do.

That's truthfulness 101.

[Bootstrap]

Since you apparently only believe that abstract conclusions are valid, let's just look at that.

You know I do not believe that. But you choose to say that.

Protection from reinfection decreases with time since previous infection, but is, nevertheless,
higher than that conferred by vaccination with two doses at a similar time since the last
immunity-conferring event

I believe when I made this claim in the past, you and Dan Z both said I was wrong, and again complained that I was citing data from studies but disagreeing with the authors. Are you willing to admit you were wrong, since the abstract conclusions in this empirical study directly states this?

Again, I think you are being misleading here.

If you make a scientific claim and point at a scientific paper, people assume the paper agrees with your claim. Let's face it, you are pointing to the paper because you want to make your claim credible by invoking the authority of a scientific paper. That's what Dan and I were disagreeing with.

I don't think Dan or I said that your claim is clearly wrong, I think we said that there are studies that come to different conclusions and we weren't sure whether it is true or not. Often, we don't know for sure. Often, studies do reach different conclusions. I think it's important to rely on the scientific literature as a whole.

There have been many studies since then. At this point, I think that someone who has recovered from a confirmed case of Covid-19 is in the same category as someone who has been vaccinated - and in countries like Germany, those people are treated the same way. But it's still not cool to make a scientific claim, point to a paper that does not agree with you, and imply that it somehow proves your point.

That's basic honesty.

If it's a simple mistake, if you hadn't read the paper carefully, then simply apologize. Don't keep digging deeper.

[nett]

Since you apparently only believe that abstract conclusions are valid, let's just look at that.

You know I do not believe that. But you choose to say that.

Protection from reinfection decreases with time since previous infection, but is, nevertheless,
higher than that conferred by vaccination with two doses at a similar time since the last
immunity-conferring event

I believe when I made this claim in the past, you and Dan Z both said I was wrong, and again complained that I was citing data from studies but disagreeing with the authors. Are you willing to admit you were wrong, since the abstract conclusions in this empirical study directly states this?

Again, I think you are being misleading here.

If you make a scientific claim and point at a scientific paper, people assume the paper agrees with your claim. Let's face it, you are pointing to the paper because you want to make your claim credible by invoking the authority of a scientific paper. That's what Dan and I were disagreeing with.

I don't think Dan or I said that your claim is clearly wrong, I think we said that there are studies that come to different conclusions and we weren't sure whether it is true or not. Often, we don't know for sure. Often, studies do reach different conclusions. I think it's important to rely on the scientific literature as a whole.

There have been many studies since then. At this point, I think that someone who has recovered from a confirmed case of Covid-19 is in the same category as someone who has been vaccinated - and in countries like Germany, those people are treated the same way. But it's still not cool to make a scientific claim, point to a paper that does not agree with you, and imply that it somehow proves your point.

That's basic honesty.

If it's a simple mistake, if you hadn't read the paper carefully, then simply apologize. Don't keep digging deeper.

All of these factors are in terms of chance of severe outcome

Infected and recovered:
< 30 = 0.18%, 40-59 = 1.1% if 40-59, > 60 = 7.8%
These numbers are sketchy, since there is no allowance for false positives, and no attempt to correct
this makes natural immunity look worse than it likely is, probably by a lot

Vax + boost:
< 30 = 0.1% if under 39 (very few events, not statistically significant), 40-59 = 0.6% if 40-59, > 60 = 6.2%
This reflects what we already basically now, that recent vaccination is a relatively protective,
although if you correct for COVID testing inacurracy, other studies have shown that natural immunity is more protective, and lasts much longer

Vax but not boosted:
< 39 = 0.05%, for 40-59 = 0.6%, 60 = 8.1%
So boosters only improve the outcomes for > 60

Now the interesting part

Infected recovered and then vaxxed:
< 39 = 0.2%, 40-59 = 2.4%, > 60 = 10%
Not looking good...

vaxxed and then infected:
Only the >60 cohort had a meaningful number of events, but it's real bad. the risk of severe infection was over 12%

A few other extrapolations from the data:
infected/recovered but unvaccinated person/day risk is less than half at one year than a vaccinated person at 4-6 months

There are lots of other interesting data points if you care to take the time to look.

All in all, it makes sense why highly vaccinated countries are continuing to experience outbreaks. Vaccines are not just ineffective, but they are hampering natural immunity as well, which means herd immunity cannot develop, and we get more weird variants, as the virus is tenderly guided around our leaky vaccines.

[nett]

Nett, I don't care why you aren't providing the analysis you claim to have done. If you make a scientific claim, then point to a link that disagrees with your claim, that's deceitful. Maybe you did not read the article. Maybe you are not capable of reading the article. Maybe you are being intentionally deceptive.

When someone else points out the fact that the article disagrees with you, you double down by saying you did not rely on the abstract or summary, but you have done your own analysis, but you don't want to show that analysis. Even if you have done your own analysis, it is misleading to point to an article as though it supports your claims if the authors of that article clearly do not. And if you simply got it wrong, a simple apology will do.

That's truthfulness 101.

There you go again accusing me of being untruthful. You literally did this exact thing last time, and then refused to even review my detailed explanation, I assume because it was straight forward and you couldn't refute it.

You've basically just reduced your argument to ad hominem attacks. Please reconsider.

[nett]

I think that someone who has recovered from a confirmed case of Covid-19 is in the same category as someone who has been vaccinated

the risk of developing symptomatic COVID-19 was 27 times higher among the vaccinated, and the risk of hospitalization eight times higher.

If that's the same category to you, then I can understand your confusion at my analysis.

I am shocked and saddened by the things you've said about me, combined with your complete refusal to even look at the data. I never said anything mean or maligning about you.

I assume I've hit a nerve that generated all the nastiness, so I'll make the same plea that I made to Ken. Let go of your false narratives, and open your mind, it's so easy once you stop implicitly trusting the institutions that keep lying to you. Stockholm syndrome is strong, but the truth is stronger.

[nett]

The atlantic is giving us a masterclass in doublethink

In other words, Omicron is spreading in highly immune populations as quickly as the original virus did in populations with no immunity at all. If this holds and is left uncontrolled, a big Omicron wave lies ahead—bigger than we would have expected with Delta. Cases were already surging ahead of winter. The U.S. already had a too-low vaccination rate. And now Omicron threatens to eat away at the immunity we thought we had.

When ever predictions, and benchmark turns out to be wrong, what is more logical? Is a truly unique first-in-the-history-of-the-world virus? Or can we not actually vaccinate against a coronavirus, and the virus is going to have to become endemic, like the flu....

it's gets even better

Protection against infection after two doses is not looking very good. “Omicron was a huge jump in evolution,” says Jesse Bloom, an evolutionary virologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, in Seattle. In what seems to be just a few months, the virus has changed as much as Bloom says he and many researchers expected it to change “over the span of four or five years.”

Now that could not POSSIBLY have anything to do with leaky vaccines could it? Nah, that's a conspiracy theory.

[Ken]

I think that someone who has recovered from a confirmed case of Covid-19 is in the same category as someone who has been vaccinated

the risk of developing symptomatic COVID-19 was 27 times higher among the vaccinated, and the risk of hospitalization eight times higher.

If that's the same category to you, then I can understand your confusion at my analysis.

I am shocked and saddened by the things you've said about me, combined with your complete refusal to even look at the data. I never said anything mean or maligning about you.

I assume I've hit a nerve that generated all the nastiness, so I'll make the same plea that I made to Ken. Let go of your false narratives, and open your mind, it's so easy once you stop implicitly trusting the institutions that keep lying to you. Stockholm syndrome is strong, but the truth is stronger.

Believe whatever narrative you want. I will trust my wife who has been on the frontline of fighting Covid for nearly two years and tells me that nearly every single patient that they admit to the hospital and who has died of Covid in the past two surges has been unvaccinated. Nearly every one. The very few fully vaccinated patients they get are very elderly patients with multiple other co-morbidities. That isn’t a “narrative”. That is just what they see and experience. And it has been replicated in every single healthcare facility across the country.

I challenge you to find a single jurisdiction anywhere in this country where the hospitalization and death rates for vaccinated patients exceeds that for the unvaccinated patients. If your “narrative” was actually true then most of the country would be seeing higher hospitalization and death rates among the vaccinated than unvaccinated. Since most of the country is now majority vaccinated. But that simply isn’t the case anywhere. Not even remotely close.

Show us one single place in this country where the hospitalization and death rates for the vaccinated are higher than for the unvaccinated. If you are right then it should be easy because you will have examples to choose from everywhere.

[nett]

I think that someone who has recovered from a confirmed case of Covid-19 is in the same category as someone who has been vaccinated

the risk of developing symptomatic COVID-19 was 27 times higher among the vaccinated, and the risk of hospitalization eight times higher.

If that's the same category to you, then I can understand your confusion at my analysis.

I am shocked and saddened by the things you've said about me, combined with your complete refusal to even look at the data. I never said anything mean or maligning about you.

I assume I've hit a nerve that generated all the nastiness, so I'll make the same plea that I made to Ken. Let go of your false narratives, and open your mind, it's so easy once you stop implicitly trusting the institutions that keep lying to you. Stockholm syndrome is strong, but the truth is stronger.

Believe whatever narrative you want. I will trust my wife who has been on the frontline of fighting Covid for nearly two years and tells me that nearly every single patient that they admit to the hospital and who has died of Covid in the past two surges has been unvaccinated. Nearly every one. The very few fully vaccinated patients they get are very elderly patients with multiple other co-morbidities. That isn’t a “narrative”. That is just what they see and experience. And it has been replicated in every single healthcare facility across the country.

I challenge you to find a single jurisdiction anywhere in this country where the hospitalization and death rates for vaccinated patients exceeds that for the unvaccinated patients. If your “narrative” was actually true then most of the country would be seeing higher hospitalization and death rates among the vaccinated than unvaccinated. Since most of the country is now majority vaccinated. But that simply isn’t the case anywhere. Not even remotely close.

Show us one single place in this country where the hospitalization and death rates for the vaccinated are higher than for the unvaccinated. If you are right then it should be easy because you will have examples to choose from everywhere.

And I trust my SIL who is an ER nurse, who has ONLY admitted vaccinated patients for COVID for the last two weeks, and has also noted that vaccination status is routinely reported wrong due to EHR limitations, which is very convenient.

Now can we talk about what your beloved scientists said about mutations happening in 3-4 months that should have taken 10x that long?

[Ken]

If that's the same category to you, then I can understand your confusion at my analysis.

I am shocked and saddened by the things you've said about me, combined with your complete refusal to even look at the data. I never said anything mean or maligning about you.

I assume I've hit a nerve that generated all the nastiness, so I'll make the same plea that I made to Ken. Let go of your false narratives, and open your mind, it's so easy once you stop implicitly trusting the institutions that keep lying to you. Stockholm syndrome is strong, but the truth is stronger.

Believe whatever narrative you want. I will trust my wife who has been on the frontline of fighting Covid for nearly two years and tells me that nearly every single patient that they admit to the hospital and who has died of Covid in the past two surges has been unvaccinated. Nearly every one. The very few fully vaccinated patients they get are very elderly patients with multiple other co-morbidities. That isn’t a “narrative”. That is just what they see and experience. And it has been replicated in every single healthcare facility across the country.

I challenge you to find a single jurisdiction anywhere in this country where the hospitalization and death rates for vaccinated patients exceeds that for the unvaccinated patients. If your “narrative” was actually true then most of the country would be seeing higher hospitalization and death rates among the vaccinated than unvaccinated. Since most of the country is now majority vaccinated. But that simply isn’t the case anywhere. Not even remotely close.

Show us one single place in this country where the hospitalization and death rates for the vaccinated are higher than for the unvaccinated. If you are right then it should be easy because you will have examples to choose from everywhere.

And I trust my SIL who is an ER nurse, who has ONLY admitted vaccinated patients for COVID for the last two weeks, and has also noted that vaccination status is routinely reported wrong due to EHR limitations, which is very convenient.

Now can we talk about what your beloved scientists said about mutations happening in 3-4 months that should have taken 10x that long?

Most jurisdictions keep statistics on hospitalization and death rates for vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. For example, here are the statistics for tiny Holmes County Ohio where some here on MennoNet call home. Current as of this week: https://www.holmeshealth.org/corona-virus-covid-19/

Surely you can find at least one county in the country who’s Covid statistics match your assertions. If what you claim is true then the majority of the country should show higher covid hospitalization and death rates among the vaccinated. I’m just asking you to show us one single county out of the more than 3,000 counties in the US for which that is true. Just one. Can you do it?

[nett]

Believe whatever narrative you want. I will trust my wife who has been on the frontline of fighting Covid for nearly two years and tells me that nearly every single patient that they admit to the hospital and who has died of Covid in the past two surges has been unvaccinated. Nearly every one. The very few fully vaccinated patients they get are very elderly patients with multiple other co-morbidities. That isn’t a “narrative”. That is just what they see and experience. And it has been replicated in every single healthcare facility across the country.

I challenge you to find a single jurisdiction anywhere in this country where the hospitalization and death rates for vaccinated patients exceeds that for the unvaccinated patients. If your “narrative” was actually true then most of the country would be seeing higher hospitalization and death rates among the vaccinated than unvaccinated. Since most of the country is now majority vaccinated. But that simply isn’t the case anywhere. Not even remotely close.

Show us one single place in this country where the hospitalization and death rates for the vaccinated are higher than for the unvaccinated. If you are right then it should be easy because you will have examples to choose from everywhere.

And I trust my SIL who is an ER nurse, who has ONLY admitted vaccinated patients for COVID for the last two weeks, and has also noted that vaccination status is routinely reported wrong due to EHR limitations, which is very convenient.

Now can we talk about what your beloved scientists said about mutations happening in 3-4 months that should have taken 10x that long?

Most jurisdictions keep statistics on hospitalization and death rates for vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. For example, here are the statistics for tiny Holmes County Ohio where some here on MennoNet call home. Current as of this week: https://www.holmeshealth.org/corona-virus-covid-19/

Surely you can find at least one county in the country who’s Covid statistics match your assertions. If what you claim is true then the majority of the country should show higher covid hospitalization and death rates among the vaccinated. I’m just asking you to show us one single county out of the more than 3,000 counties in the US for which that is true. Just one. Can you do it?

Would an entire country suffice?