Absolute garbage study. it's saying that anyone who dies after vaccination died because of vaccination

I think at those sort of level they would be runing into bullets.

I think it only becomes a problem if the systems break down which they might - then we're ****ed. Otherwise we will cower happily in our shelters with food and the internet on tap.

We need to include the R number and the transmission mechanisms. Lots of very nasty diseases but if the R number is low and/or it's symptomatic transmission then it's handled fairly easily. At the other extreme if R is very high and it's robustly airborn then what can we do?

They report says 4.11 deaths per 100,000 doses and Europe has administered 300mil doses.
That would be 12,000 dead in Europe from the vaccine. Is that the case?

Dunno but there's a lot of extremely old/frail people in Europe and I doubt the side effects aren't potentially very serious for them. Nowhere near as serious as getting covid of course

You have a very poor understanding of the issues or what reality is.

Most Australians have lived a normal life through covid while the rest of the world has been in lockdown. The death rate is 1/50th the rest of the world. Their experience of covid has been amazing compared to the other countries: far fewer lockdowns, far more personal freedom, far less fear of covid, and far fewer deaths. That you are attacking a strategy that has superior outcomes on every single metric by far makes you a stupid person.

You're also misinterpreting the data. The number infected includes those in quarantine. Australia essentially has zero infections in the population except when a case escapes the incoming traveler quarantine system. They then get it back to zero by locking down the local area.

The worst outbreak in Australia (in Victoria) and most of the tiny number of deaths in Australia happened because the left wing loser government in that state hired an incompetent/inexperienced/unprofessional indigenous security company to do the quarantine security in order to meet diversity quotas, and some of the unprofessional security guards had sex with the quarantined travelers. The isolation and eradication strategy is sound when well implemented.and as noted above in bold, even has far superior outcomes when not well implemented.

I mean, on what planet are you from where you're arguing that a strategy that's had far better outcomes on every single metric and is widely supported by the public is inferior? That's just weird bro.

As for now, we'll see what happens with delta. Even if delta is uncontainable right now, there is more than adequate time to get fully vaccinated to UK levels. Even with R = 3 (the minor-restrictions delta spread rate) it would take 20 weeks to infect 1% of the population while the rest get vaccinated.

So your analysis is just stupid on every single level possible.

Im not attacking the Australian approach.

All I have done it point out that unless it gets vaccinated soon, its the most vulnerable country to new variants etc because it has low natural immunity and vaccination, which would leave it in a position of continuous rolling lockdowns, which is exactly what is happening right now, in reality.

One fifth of the Australian population is in full lockdown because of Delta.

Given the needle barely has to move for lockdown to be implemented in Australia, but its getting easier and easier for said needle to move, then all other things being equal, there are going to be a lot more lockdowns in Australia going forward.

Australia is currently in a much more severe lockdown than any country in Europe.

If USA had the Australian strategy, most if not all states in the USA currently would be in severe lockdown.

No one would argue against this harder than you.

No one has been a harsher critic of the Australian approach than you.

There approach is the antithesis of everything you have argued for in this thread.

This needs repeating:

The green line country has 20% of its population in full lockdown.

The red line country would totally lose its **** at that suggestion with its current case load.



backtrackements and caveats incoming.

The point you are missing is that Australia has had European lockdowns.

Its not escaped absolutely scott free from mitigations, which seems to be the picture you are trying to paint, but its CPM has never got above 20.

At no point in the pandemic has case load got even close to that low in the USA.

Even now its still 2 times the most severe outbreak in Australia.

So in short, if Australia does not increase its vaccination rate, and the virus keeps getting more infectious, Australia will be having a **** ton of lockdowns going forward because the needle barely has to move above zero for lockdowns to happen in Australia.

You basically reiterated what you've already said and I've debunked. Again, being a black and white binary thinker leads you down these weird paths.

I've always had exactly the same position since covid first appeared in Wuhan:

1. IF an eradication strategy is possible in a country (strong existing border control, low incoming flows, isolated, centralized power, compliant populace, competent health and policing bureacracy, experts who aren't morons, a CDC who doesn't botch tests then lie about it), it's by far the superior strategy. Much of Asia has implemented this to great effect, as has Australia. China has an eradication strategy and they've done fantastically.

2. IF an eradication strategy isn't possible (decentralized health and policing, bureaucracies with brain dead corrupt losers US-style, high incoming flow, porous borders, low population compliance with test and trace for example in minority communities in NY at 35% compliance), the best thing is to slow burn it through the population with minor restrictions and stay mostly open.

I suggested going all out on (1) globally early in the pandemic to kill it in its crib was clearly correct, but because the experts are left wing morons that let the cat it out of the bag, (2) was the only strategy left.

I don't even know how anyone can disagree with this given that the results are now in. I've taken this position from the start because it's logical and correct and obvious and the experiment has been run and my view has been fully validated.

That's because Europe is in summer which eradicates covid classic and the UK strain, and delta hasn't had enough time to spread.

No sir. You just have a really bad case of black and white thinking. For real bro, for your own sake, get a handle on this, it's mind blowing how black and white, first-level your thinking is. You're missing all the nuance and (correct) branching logic staying on the first level (is it A or is it B? is about as deep as you go)

That's not the picture I'm trying to pain at all as can be plainly read ("Australia had fewer lockdowns and more normal life"). I said that on every metric (normality of life, deaths, fear, average population time under lockdown), since covid has started, Australia has had a far better outcome. That's not even debatable. The same is true for the Asian countries that pursued an eradication strategy.

Try thinking before you post.

UK for example is magnitudes higher case load than Australia, with Delta.

No lockdown.

Europe Cases Per Million : 61.86

Australia : 0.64

The bottom country has 20% of its population in lockdown.

None of the reasons you give are relevant in any way as whatever Summer does to covid in Europe, Europe still has magnitudes higher levels of Covid.

The facts and data are not close to disputable.

If Australia does not vaccinate quickly, it will have to have lockdown after lockdown or change its policy, as barely any CPM is required for LD in Australia.

You're blowing my mind, OAFK11. How does reality slide right by you so easily? I'm not your teacher and have better things to do, but I'll explain:

If R<1 because of summer, you don't have to lock down (regardless of case numbers)
If R>>1, you have to lock down eventually (regardless of current case numbers) and it's better to do it early and contact trace it to zero if you can.

Let me show you a graph of a country without many vaccinations, Montenegro and Bulgaria, compared to the high-vaccination USA:



Exactly the same result (vaccinations were irrelevant in dropping cases to near zero). Montenegro and Bulgaria were able to remove lockdown and still have covid dive because R is less than 1 from mid spring onwards, you silly person, not because they were vaccinated.

This is the second time you've been confused by R vs case numbers - the first time was when it blew your mind that Europe was about to soar past the US from far lower case numbers. You really need to get a handle on this stuff if you're going to discuss it intelligently.

The report just logs people dying from what I've read.

I don't have the exact number but death rate in Europe is around 10/1000 / year

If we administer 300 mil people with the vaccine, 3 million of those will be death a year later (or 100 per 100.000).

We have looked at excess death all year now with COVID, we don't need magic studies to tell us what's happening post vaccination

https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps/

Excess death is down everywhere.

If the vaccine is killing lots of people, it's not visible at the moment.

ad hominem.

I will be deleting you from this forum.

Sometimes you can be good and evading moderation and terrible at bringing actual content to the table.

For those that don't know an "ad hominem" is when someone tries to survive by attacking others characters rather than contributing rationality and reason to the argument. Toothsayer never contributes and only ever attacks character. Once we removed his account from the bitcoin thread real discussion developed.

Does the UK have a R less than 1?

No.

Also CPM in Europe is increasing not decreasing.

Does UK have a lockdown with a higher R than Australia and much much higher CPM?

No more attacking peoples character. You only get to assert reason.

Dear sir,
1. You are completely crazy
2. Everything I do is about asserting reason. All my positions are argued with extensive data and reasoning. Occasionally someone is so dense and wasting everyone's time - like OAFK11 is above - that I do them a favor and explain where their thinking is silly.
This thread is full of amazing and useful covid content from me. We can see your own contribution above - 5 posts in a row of pure nonsense that have nothing to do with covid. OAFK11 and I might disagree vigorously but we do it about content that is at least illuminating on the subject at hand. You're basically a gibberish generator here and in the bitcoin thread.
This isn't even remotely true. I post the greatest amount of data and useful content of anyone in this thread by far. Why would you lie, jbouton?
No, once I stopped posting you just felt free to start posting your crazy bitcoin rants again which bulls themselves openly mock you for. The bitcoin thread is a bull thread and the bears get systematically excluded, because it's a silly cult with its own in phrases like "hodl moon", and you are precious and allergic to anyone who disagrees with your "wisdom". As evidence of the crazy: you currently have a thread with 9 posts of yours in a row and 1 responder, which is a forum record I think of echo chamber crazy.

Back in your box, jbouton. Or post something about covid, which you might notice the rest of us are doing despite disagreeing - we're disagreeing about content whereas you've appointed yourself as hall monitor and have no made 5 posts completely unrelated to covid. Post something about covid or go back to your containment thread that no one is reading, son.

It must be frustrating to post what you believe are pearls of your deep wisdom (like I said, you're completely crazy) and get openly mocked for it (lonelybutrich is the funniest mocker of you, go back and read the bitcoin thread and his replies to you with the understanding that he's mocking you, it's gold), or to start your own thread with 9 posts in a row of your "deep" thinking on bitcoin and only one person replies. So now you're following me around to different threads to try and be relevant. If you need some attention (which you clearly do), post arguments and information of worth to others, as I do. It's not a high bar but you seem unable to get over it.

I wonder if Tooth ever went full ham attacking the policies of Australia but is now calling people idiots for daring cast any shade on it.

I wonder....


The bellow are all observations made by Tooth about Australia:

So much more where this came from, got bored pasting it.


Today though, Australia is favourite country No1.

Yes you are.

Firstly, it's hilarious that you're so cut you spent all that time on an ad hominem. Ouch man (for you).

Secondly, I notice you quote none of the posts (instead copy paste snippets) so that people are unable to read the context and understand that you're lying. That's deliberate and dishonest.

Once again it's black and white thinking from you, you cannot understand what's being said because you can only think on a single level. It's quite extraordinary, your cognitive incapacity; you're simply wasting everyone's time with it while not even realizing you have it.

Elimination is the optimal strategy if possible but it comes at very high cost. The cost is far lower than being unable to eliminate but still very high.

I used Victoria (Australian state) and as example of the cost of pursuing an elimination strategy in an Australian state where they screwed it up. The cost was very high to go to elimination. I used it as an example of how containment is total folly in worse situations (for example the US or Europe) which are less suited to an eradication strategy. That view has been proven correct.

Overall though, eradication is the correct strategy for Australia's and many Asian country's circumstances and has worked very well. Australia and much of Asia has:

1. Far lower average time spent in lockdown even with the state who screwed it up
2. Far less fear among seniors (very little)
3. Far more normal level of life during the covid period on average (almost normal life and socializing)
4. Far lower death rate (1/50th of the dead in Europe/USA).

So yes, Australia's strategy is suitable for them and far superior on every single metric. Doesn't mean I can't use the experience of one their states as an example of the high cost of an eradication strategy at the local level. None of that has anything to do with the overall country strategy, any more than the UK strategy has anything to do with whether Scotland has a bad time.

Dude anyone who goes and reads the posts will see you are fully unloading on Australia and its policies, those quotes perfectly summarise your opinion and there is nothing close to dishonest or lying in anyway.

You have been caught with your pants down in this way AGAIN.

You are absolutely full of **** and utterly worthless, your not even funny anymore, which was your one contribution.

To be fair - the following recent interaction was unintentionally funny

I did exactly that. Here's one of your quotes you took quotes from, in context:

Your attempt above is a straight up deliberate lie in order for you to save some face, which is why you don't quote the posts.

No, the above proves that you deliberately didn't quote the posts to mislead on the context. Nothing has changed for me ever on my opinion here - I love Australia's strategy for them (they're lucky to have the conditions to do it) but laid above difficulties they've had despite it being good for them and hence why it won't work for other places that are less suitable. That was the whole thrust of the conversation: Q: "Australia has low covid, why can't the US do it?" A: "Australia is lucky in that the strategy can work for them, but here are the costs and they don't scale to the far worse conditions in the US for trying this".

My position has been consistent and correct the whole time. You not only have a terrible case of black and white thinking which wastes everyone's time, you have now been caught with your pants down being completely dishonest/lying taking quotes out of context and deliberately not providing the click-through context to the original as is always done. It is very clear what I mean in context and it's exactly what I mean here.

This is so embarrassing for you. I mean, lol. Take a break from posting maybe.

OAFK11,
Perhaps in future if you read the discussion in context rather than rage-froth quote mining from a year ago - and improved your terrible reading comprehension - you wouldn't have huge amounts of egg on your face right now. I mean, lol man. The most charitable take on our recent interaction is that you have such an extreme case of black and white thinking and you're so desperate and frothed up trying to quote-mine a win that you didn't even read the posts in question to understand their context. But the fact that you eliminated the context so that no one could click through and see that you were lying indicates to me that you were deliberately being dishonest.

Please do something about that black and white thinking. Your posting here with single-level thinking is just a waste of yours and everyone's time, man. We could be discussing useful stuff instead rather than stuck in your confusions from your single level black and white thinking.

Lol thinking that posting that quote in full changes anything.

That is a lie and anyone who wants to read through your frothing insult filled anti Australian ranting on page 170 will clearly see that.

You have cherry picked the one post with the least ranting in it, a post I took one quote from. You are less than a joke of a poster.

Its not binary thinking, its not having the total and utter double think you have to hold numerous contradictory positions at once.

Your positions (plural) could not be further from consistent.

Your posting is diametrically opposed to the concept of consistency.