Anyone here delaying/ thinking of delaying their second dose of Pfizer/Moderna due to some tentative research that indicates waiting longer than the 3/4 week recommended date may increase antibodies?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/covid...tudy-1.6026765

That is the standard answer of someone who does not have an actual answer. If you cannot actually explain it then deflect with a low grade personal attack. I understand the need for you to use that tactic - I was just hoping you would be more entertaining when doing it to help you compete with the colorful cast of derps here. I am disappointed as I guessed that Liechtenstein would have the next chart posted by one. The right answer was Cyprus. Anyways, congrats on your choices again moving forward!

All the best.

...is not your slave. The 1800s called and want your ****ed up way of thinking back.

they dont even have 50% of their population vaxd anything less then 85% is pointless to analyze. also even with their paltry 47% vaxd numbers hispital capacity and deaths are a nonfactor currecntly in cyprus, vaccines working as intended

im not even white, its the uneducated white hillbillys getting decimated that i get a hardon for.

Looks like you're out of luck then.

https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covi...ace-ethnicity/


And you're still a racist by the way. You shouldn't wish death on people of any race.

im talking about whats coming in following months. yes some are still not vaxxed due to lack of awareness or fear but over the course of this next year most of them will get the jab only the defiant trumptards/conspiracy theorists will holdout thats the group thats ripe for an increased lethality mutation

The sort of phenomena I mentioned. Not sex parties maybe but partying like they were safe as soon as they got jabbed. Partly stupidity but that was also a younger group than the double jabbed and it coincided with delta

I'd like to see it broken down by period since the first jab as I'd expect a heavy skewing to the first 2 weeks once case prevalence was adjusted for.

Just thought on hospitalisation data. Have to be slightly wary about this because it's a function of capacity as well as cases. In the first wave in the uk for example, large numbers died at home when now most would be hospitalised. That may change it gets bad.

You are only two of the three I mentioned.

I've seen a few people refer to the vaccines as "experimental" in this thread. What is exactly "experimental" about it? Scientifically speaking.

Is it more or less experimental than say a flu shot? Or previous vaccines that helped eradicate diseases like polio and small pox?

What are the specifics behind the science that makes it "experimental" and at what point would it NOT be considered experimental?

Or, what conditions (scientifically speaking) would make a vaccine NOT experimental?

experimental is the favorite phrase of the low socioeconomic background truthers. they think if it gets full fda approval instead of emergency is miraculously no longer experimental. their entire thought process is flawed because they lack education to understand even the basics of our evolved human life. the non-mrna vaccines like az, sinopharm,jj etc were made using extremely outdated technology exactly for those skeptics. but because their education and family iq is so low they just lump them all together.

Cousin Festus said that them city slickers is trying to trick us. But we know what's going on. Yes sirree bob.

Pretty random reply, so credit for being unpredictable, though points lost as it makes no sense. You not knowing how to answer a simple question has nothing to do with 19th century slavery attitudes, rather it is just you not knowing how to answer a question. Nothing more, nothing less. If you want to update your comebacks, while maintaining the same level of quality (and still being retro), you can reply with "the jerk store called, they are running out of you." Anyway, congratulations again on the choices you have made regarding the topic of this thread- definitely the correct ones. Let's see what entertainment value the derps bring this coming week!

All the best.

This thread is derailing very quickly now, which is a shame. Can we get back to analyzing the data and discussing current situations + predictions?

I think datasets such as these are very useful, published by Public Health Scotland: https://publichealthscotland.scot/me...ion_report.pdf. Using the numbers here published that looks at the reported cased and acute hospital admissions of vaccinated vs unvaccinated, we get the following vaccine efficacies (if my math is correct):



I think the notable point here is that the efficacy to prevent hospitalizations (which is the real important metric here imo) is nowhere near the widely advertised >90%. The on average 60% efficacy is, however, of course still useful and so saying that vaccines don't work at all is incorrect (this could change in the future).

A potential point of concern is that the trend of vaccine efficacy measured in number of cases is declining; this might reflect the quick spread under the young population initially (low vaccination rates, so this will artificially inflate efficacy) continuing into spread among the older population. In the same way, the efficacy for acute hospital admissions might be inflated as it is expected that it will be mostly the old and weak (with high vaccination rates) that need hospital admission. Unfortunately this dataset does not break down the the vaccinated/unvaccinated by age category.

Yeah I'd love if this could get back to a serious thread. But honestly the moderators here are just terrible; Monterey should have been banned from BFI the moment he said that all posts here have zero value. That's an admission that he has no interest in contributing positively here => banhammer. Easiest thing ever. And Cuepee is just a volume madlibs generator with a dopey dad brain and the situational comprehension of a dumb child, which everyone who wants to seriously discuss this agrees on. While losers like Howard continue to whine about them while not asking for them to be banned, nothing will change.

As for the vaccine infection efficacy, it's way too high since test attempts are usually symptom based and the vaccine reduces symptoms. I think the vaccines are basically unable to get R below 1.

As for hospital admissions, the rates seem too low. I suspect vaccines are >80% at preventing hospital admission. Not sure why the data is showing 50-60%, I might go hunting for some higher resolution (age-based) data to get a firm answer as a lot depends on it.

Yes please.

The data is going to converge fairly quickly now but I'd conjecture that the data is better than you suggest.

A big chunk of the vaccinated group will be recently vaccinated or the very old/frail, some of whom while testing +ve for covid but may well have been in hospital anway. Also in the early stages older people are beign admitted as a precaution more often and kept in longer for the same reason - that will drop of as capacity becomes a serious problem. The real measure will be deaths and that afiak is where the 90%+ efficacy comes in. I've never seen 90% claimed for anything else btw.

One of the reason I think the data is far more likely to look better rathar than worse once analysed is (and I know some will howl in derision) that the experts who do have that access are still confident. They would be screaming through the rafters if the protection from death was already showed signs of dropping significantly. Early days though and they're certainly not claiming the data proves the 90%+ is right.

Its worth pointing out that Scotland is a very unhealthy country.

Toothsawer, you may want to consider making an appeal to the new owners of this site before they remove all moderators. You can find their post in NVG along with their profile shot of them with women, so you may not be able to relate to them initially. Perhaps you can ask them to join some of their new Discord chat channels, since it is unlikely you were invited yet.

By the way, I do like that you started with a whine about getting people banned then ended by finding fault in someone else who you say whines. Guess your whines are from different vintages, but that still fits the serious thread perfectly. Anyway, try to make next week a derpy entertaining one, and you should definitely start replying to and chatting with bobbyJ as he is one of your best allies here.

All the best.

Neil Ferguson on the BBC this morning

100k cases per day pretty much inevitable (ldo). Has now added 'or even higher' to his top of range 200k.

He says it looks like people admited to hospital are not as severley ill as before

Emphasied how much uncertainty there is.

Diabetics make up 40% of COVID deaths in US, experts say



Wow. Worth noting that Type 2, preventable and reversible, represents like 95% of diabetes cases.

It would be interesting to see of the 245k deaths what % were Type 2 vs 1.

Might be right but always worring when they say things like 40% of deaths from 10% of the population.

The relevant stat is actual deaths compared to how many you would expect from the population weighted for age. Otherwise it might be mostly saying that older people are more likely to be diabetic

The vaccines are giving children diabetes. Open your eyes guys this is all part of the plandemic

Yeah that's the sort of statistic that should immediately trigger alarm bells about its significance. Given the correlation of both age and weight with diabetes I wouldn't even be confident that that 40% number suggests any link at all between diabetes and Covid mortality that isn't explained by the correlations with other Covid risk factors.

I agree. the numbers look more ominous than any other time during the pandemic in the UK, but the current measures appear to be broadly supported by those scientists closest to the data