Generic Virus Thread

[brommy]

1 minute ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

More like treading water cause the first life boat had a mental murderer rowing it.

Are you comparing the AZ vaccine to a mental murderer or have you moved the analogy to Swedish politics?

[sidcow]

1 hour ago, bickster said:

Most is doing some heavy lifting there

Imagine if the headline read 1 in 5 positive rapid tests are wrong

I think that 8 in 10 being correct is not exactly the "might as well wave your finger in the air" description that was being bandied around before though.   Identifying 8 in 10 infections almost immediately they occur is a vital tool.

[KenjiOgiwara]

10 minutes ago, brommy said:

Are you comparing the AZ vaccine to a mental murderer or have you moved the analogy to Swedish politics?

Yes. Your analogy didn't make sense. The vaccine is unstable with lethal side effects. I'd say mental murderer fits. 

[limpid]

1 minute ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

Yes. Your analogy didn't make sense. The vaccine is unstable with lethal side effects. I'd say mental murderer fits. 

Unstable in what way? Because it needs to be kept in a fridge?

A lower incidence of blood clots in a 17m cohort cf the incidence in the general population is a "mental murderer"?

Wow.

[bickster]

32 minutes ago, sidcow said:

I think that 8 in 10 being correct is not exactly the "might as well wave your finger in the air" description that was being bandied around before though.   Identifying 8 in 10 infections almost immediately they occur is a vital tool.

You are forgetting the false negatives in your 8 in 10. They didn't mention them

[brommy]

24 minutes ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

Yes. Your analogy didn't make sense. The vaccine is unstable with lethal side effects. I'd say mental murderer fits. 

That’s seriously skewed and deeply flawed. The education of risk is so important in life.

[sidcow]

17 minutes ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

Yes. Your analogy didn't make sense. The vaccine is unstable with lethal side effects. I'd say mental murderer fits. 

It's actually a fairly good analogy. 

You are on The Titanic.  You're offered a place in a lifeboat but refuse it because they're a bit small and dangerous looking for your liking .  Despite saving thousands of lives of lives you worry about that lifeboat you once heard of which sank so it's not for you, despite all those British people beckoning at you from the safety of their boats and shouting "jump" whilst drinking their warm beer. 

The Carpathia is a big strong ship, I've heard she's on the way. I'll just sit here and wait for her to turn up and hope the Titanic doesn't sink and kill me before she gets here. 

Doesn't the music from that string quartet sound nice, anyone got a deckchair? 

[sidcow]

5 minutes ago, bickster said:

You are forgetting the false negatives in your 8 in 10. They didn't mention them

Well they didn't mention them so neither did I.  Is that not also out or date information? 

In any case, they changed their tune on positive quick tests and now allow you to got get a proper test so that should take out the vast majority of false negatives. 

[bannedfromHandV]

3 minutes ago, sidcow said:

It's actually a fairly good analogy. 

You are on The Titanic.  You're offered a place in a lifeboat but refuse it because they're a bit small and dangerous looking for your liking .  Despite saving thousands of lives of lives you worry about that lifeboat you once heard of which sank so it's not for you, despite all those British people beckoning at you from the safety of their boats and shouting "jump" whilst drinking their warm beer. 

The Carpathia is a big strong ship, I've heard she's on the way. I'll just sit here and wait for her to turn up and hope the Titanic doesn't sink and kill me before she gets here. 

Doesn't the music from that string quartet sound nice, anyone got a deckchair? 

All fine except if you stay on the titanic you die, there’s little evidence to suggest you WILL die if you do not take the vaccine. Unless I’m mistaken it’s still less than a 1% chance isn’t it statistically? 

[Genie]

I wonder how many people ask their doctors about effectiveness of the prescribed drugs for say a chest infection, especially if it’s for their children. Or the likelihood of developing side effects.
I bet before 2020 it was almost zero.

I bet the likelihood of antibiotics working in many cases is relatively low. They don’t stop you passing the infection on or from getting another infection soon after. People seem to be ok with them though. In fact the problem facing a lot of doctors is people DEMANDING antibiotics. 

It continues the recent theme of not trusting experts. 
 

Edited April 15, 2021 by Genie

[sidcow]

1 minute ago, bannedfromHandV said:

All fine except if you stay on the titanic you die, there’s little evidence to suggest you WILL die if you do not take the vaccine. Unless I’m mistaken it’s still less than a 1% chance isn’t it statistically? 

You are mistaken.  It lessens the younger you get but never to less than 1 in a million. 

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-and-covid-19-younger-adults-are-at-risk-too

Coronavirus and COVID-19: Younger Adults Are at Risk, Too

Quote

At  the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, reports indicated that the disease was mostly affecting older adults, and that young people were more likely to have milder cases of the disease.

Quote

But according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), over the summer, in the United States, people under age 30 accounted for more than 20% of COVID-19 cases and were seen as more likely to transmit the virus than others. This trend has continued into the fall.

Quote

Data from one study shows that of more than 3,000 adults ages 18 to 34 who contracted COVID-19 and became sick enough to require hospital care, 21% ended up in intensive care, 10% were placed on a breathing machine and 2.7% died.

 

[brommy]

1 minute ago, OutByEaster? said:

You're 1,000 times more likely to develop blood clots through being on a flight than you are through the Astra Zeneca vaccine.

 

An excellent point, Greta.

[KenjiOgiwara]

22 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

All fine except if you stay on the titanic you die, there’s little evidence to suggest you WILL die if you do not take the vaccine. Unless I’m mistaken it’s still less than a 1% chance isn’t it statistically? 

It's obviously a completely moronic analogy, but he has to continue with it now. 

[KenjiOgiwara]

45 minutes ago, limpid said:

Unstable in what way?

In the sense it's killing people. In small numbers, but it still is. I have a feeling, a small suspicion, that wasn't the intention making the vaccine. 

[bannedfromHandV]

15 minutes ago, sidcow said:

You are mistaken.  It lessens the younger you get but never to less than 1 in a million. 

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-and-covid-19-younger-adults-are-at-risk-too

Coronavirus and COVID-19: Younger Adults Are at Risk, Too

 

I never said anything about one in a million, I said 1% (or less than), so one in a hundred.

Yes, we all know by now that anyone CAN be affected but it doesn’t mean anyone WILL be affected.

I don’t understand the relevance of the rest of the stuff you quoted to be honest, feels like searching for stuff to justify your stance but that’s your prerogative.

[limpid]

Just now, KenjiOgiwara said:

In the sense it's killing people. In small numbers, but it still is. I have a feeling, a small suspicion, that wasn't the intention making the vaccine. 

In a statistically significant cohort (17m samples), it reduced the incidence of blood clots compared the the general population. That means if you were going to draw a conclusion on noise in the data then it was beneficial AGAINST BLOOD CLOTS compared with not giving it. It would be futile to draw any conclusion from so few cases either way.

[Genie]

3 hours ago, Dante_Lockhart said:

I'm still in the not having the jab camp.

Obviously it’s completely your choice.

You can tell me it’s none of my business if you want, but do you take any other regular medication for existing conditions? 
Did you ever look into or become concerned about potential for side affects? I don’t think people generally do. We trust that our GP or Consultant has weighed up the risks on our behalf when prescribing.

1 in a million chance of a blood clot is probably far less risk than many of the drugs people are taking everyday without a second thought. As has been said, it’s far less risk than many activities like taking a flight or trip in the car.

It’s just funny how something gets tagged a “dangerous” or “ineffective” when in reality it’s incredibly good all things considered. Shaking that label off is very hard once it’s been attached (because as I said, there’s a new distrust of experts).
 

[KenjiOgiwara]

11 minutes ago, limpid said:

In a statistically significant cohort (17m samples), it reduced the incidence of blood clots compared the the general population. That means if you were going to draw a conclusion on noise in the data then it was beneficial AGAINST BLOOD CLOTS compared with not giving it. It would be futile to draw any conclusion from so few cases either way.

But it's not those numbers here. We can start digging up the average numbers of nurses in the age group 30-50 dying of brain hemorrage in a two week period in the spring, then compare data. Can guarantee you different numbers. And that's before we're mentioning the rare combination of bleeding and clots, which isn't even something they see ever. 

Either way the main point is that people are seeing less adverse effects of a different vaccine, so there's no reason to take AZ.

Edited April 15, 2021 by KenjiOgiwara

[limpid]

1 minute ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

But it's not those numbers here. We can start digging up the average numbers of nurses in the age group 30-50 dying of brain hemorrage in a two week period in the spring, then compare data. Can guarantee you different data.

Either way the main point is that people are seeing less adverse effects of a different vaccine, so there's not reason to take AZ.

Please show the data. Size of cohort and numbers of adverse reactions compared with the expected incidence of those reactions in the general population. I can do the same for my data, but it's already been posted many times in this thread.

[sidcow]

28 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

I never said anything about one in a million, I said 1% (or less than), so one in a hundred.

Yes, we all know by now that anyone CAN be affected but it doesn’t mean anyone WILL be affected.

I don’t understand the relevance of the rest of the stuff you quoted to be honest, feels like searching for stuff to justify your stance but that’s your prerogative.

I have no stance to justify.  I'm simply answering your question. That report said 2.7% of under 30's died in their sample.  That's more than the % who die of Clots.

Sorry I see your point.  I think it's pretty certain that without vaccination most people (specially those younger ones we are now mainly worried about) are going to have some kind of brush with Rona.

Edited April 15, 2021 by sidcow