Using the Cape Cod data to come to any meaningful conclusions is difficult. This was basically a multi-day party full of gay men. Packed indoor bars and clubs and (I'm going to go out on a limb and assume) a fair amount of intimate physical contact.

It does not really translate to the types of public interactions most people have in grocery stores, work, school, etc.

At any rate even in this extreme case the vaccines worked well to prevent hospitalization and death. Of course if the clubs were full of 80 year olds partying, it would likely be a much different outcome. These were young people. The vaccinated elderly are still at some risk (albeit greatly reduced). Which is why Israel is giving it's older citizens boosters and why the US should start doing the same asap.

Please justify this statement using the data in the study. Because I can't; it seems completely false from the data available. Thanks.

You (and others) need to learn to have some respect for other people, and to the tell the truth rather than push an agenda; people like you and Monteroy are the reason there's so much vaccine skepticism. Just be honest about what the data says and leave it at that; when you lie to people and push narratives at odds with the data (as happened with masks), you lose public trust, and once that happens, you create exactly the situation that parts of the US and much of Europe are in now: people think the authorities are full of crap (which they are) even though they're mostly telling the truth about the vaccines.

If I hated science then I would be the type that posts my anti-science manifestos on the internet like you do. You dress it up with your belief of being intelligent, but you post with a clear agenda, which is fine - I do not care, nor does anyone else really what is said in a fringe thread on an outdated online poker forum.

Do you seriously think the Snowman guy gave any really thought or analysis to the data to make his determination? He obviously gave none to it, and just cut and paste it and tossed out a "LOL see!" type thing to support whatever it is he wants to believe, and that has always been the pattern of conspiracyderps throughout time. Those cases were a good indication that fully vaccinated people will catch and spread Delta (as has now been announced), but very few were sick and nobody died. Pretty much all at that closed off party were vaccinated - it was not just random people at a Walmart, but Snowmandude does not bother with details like that. Go figure that an event with basically all vaccinated people that has an outbreak (because of how Delta spreads) were mainly vaccinated people. Shocking.

As I mentioned, early in this thread a lot of those same people were saying Covid is a hoax. That messaging became obviously outdated, so it adjusted to the vaccines are more deadly than Covid. That became outdated when millions did not actually die from them as predicted by some, so then it became that meanie rich countries are screwing poor countries, as if shipping 5 million doses to Yemen that have special storage needs will magically get
distributed without issue.

I get why you and others constantly change messaging, and I also completely understand why you generally keep a distance from some of the other anti vaccine voices in this thread based on how they post, but all of that does not matter now. Now is the time to let it rip and get as many voluntary unvaccinated people innoculated as possible, whether that is by them choosing to get the vaccine or going the more patriotic, natural method. Do you agree with this or not - yes or no that it is time to let it rip? You are welcome to hurl some personal attacks as needed as well, as doing that has always been an important part of why you post, but again it really comes down to that simple strategy, and if you agree then it is time we work together to give consistent messaging in that regard.

I have a physics degree so I obviously love science, data and rationality. It is the fact that I love it that makes me find your hatred of it so toxic; you are here for agendas, not reality.

The data spoke for itself. Nothing else was required. That you had such a problem it shows a complete lack of interest in data, and proves you are here for politics and not reality.

Actually, it says the opposite. If you cared about data and reality instead of politics and posturing, you would realize what the data says and what are you saying is false.

Again, you're completely missing the point and showing your intellectual bankruptcy. You haven't even looked at the data because you don't care about it; you're here for agendas and trolling and not reality and honest discussion. A substantial portion were unvaccinated, and the ratios of vaccinated to unvaccinated in the cases and hospitalized were similar to the population, showing exactly what I listed:

From this dataset, the vaccine was

a) Useless at preventing transmission
b) Useless at preventing hospitalization in this demographic (40 something males mostly).
c) Useless at even reducing viral loads; PCR levels were identical in the two groups

The dataset is so surprising I have trouble believing it.

The vaccine was conferring no protection in this group, which is such a surprising result I even question the data. But you haven't even looked at the data.

Yes, mostly the people who are now pro mask and fundamentalist and lying on vaccines. I was beating the covid drum from January in the 2020 trading thread, saying it would crash the market and be a global lockdown pandemic; it was the orthodox who laughed at that. I predicted Moderna would be a success on early data; the orthodox laughed at that too. The orthodox take has been amazing wrong throughout all this.

What?
You're debating against a few rednecks and no one here. And did an absurd straw man on Yemen and rich/poor countries. You're here to be a zero content troll and let out your bottled misanthropy; there's no interest in content or data on your side.

I'm not really posting much now, because of pure trolling trash like yourself who, if jaxeland didn't suck, would have been banned a long ago because you add nothing and openly diss the forum. The forum gets politics posts and loses data analysis; jaxeland is choosing his adventure I guess.

What is this thrash? First you say all posts here have zero value - including yours - and now you say we have to work together on messaging?

Nothing has changed in my beliefs ever - it's pretty simple - the correct way to deal with covid if you can't pursue an eradication strategy is to keep infections at a level below hospital overwhelming and otherwise let people live their lives as normally as possible. I don't buy into your sick misanthropy and hatred of people which is driving your comment above (have some self aware for God's sake); you really need to get outside for a while (an exile would do you good)

What does "vaccine coverage of eligible Massachusetts residents was 69 per cent" mean, exactly? How do we know that the Barnstable partiers were representative of that rate? If the base rate of vaccination among that set is higher, wouldn't that skew this result?

There seems to be something wrong with that study.

1/123 unvaccinated hospitalizations
4/346 vaccinated hospitalizations

Being unvaccinated also worked pretty well to prevent hospitalization and death.

For a second there I almost thought you guys actually spent 5 minutes reading the research. Your criticisms of the data are acknowledged.

This research will probably have the most overlapping demographics as 2p2 posters, almost exclusively 20 to 70 year old men.

How many thousands were in the sample size? What percentage of overall attendees got infected? What percentage of overall attendees were vaccinated? For all we know, 10% of vaccinated attendees got infected, and 70% of non-vaccinated attendees. I am just using those numbers at random but the point holds, we don't know. At any rate it doesn't matter that much because preventing mild infection is not the important end result.

Regarding deaths, there were zero. 4 vaccinated people out of the however many thousands in attendance ended up in the hospital. We know from the report that 2 had underlying conditions and 1 was 70 years old (could be the same person). And again, here's an important statistic... zero died.

It is a stretch to take that data and come to the conclusions that vaccines don't work. Especially when there are mountains of real world data that show otherwise, that don't involve a single outlier event of a multi-day summer holiday party of young gay men.

I see nothing in your post that justifies your statement.

How many of the hundreds of unvaccinated:

a) Were hospitalized
b) Died

This is a good indication that lack of vaccination protects you from bad covid outcomes, no?

You are so desperate to spin vaccines = panacea that you no longer care about data. I completely agree that this is an outlier so far, but it's a pretty shocking one given that most of these are Moderna/Pfizer and the very high protection rates claimed for these vaccines.

None of your hypotheticals are compelling. Both the background MA vaccination rate and the general gay vaccination rate from surveys are below the vaccinated infected rate in this study. You'd have to do some crazy special pleading for your 70/10 situation. This study is a weird and concerning piece of data at a time when the government is actively deliberately lying about vaccines effectiveness (99.5% for example). I'm actually hoping that the study is broken in some way because the data is so surprising and concerning.

On that data, vaccines don't work -- infection rates and hospitalization rates are higher among the vaccinated than among the unvaccinated. That's a reasonable inference from that study, with some potential holes. It doesn't change my mind that vaccines work. But something seems amiss.

You do not get human behavior. I do not hate you, I just do not care at all about your existence, and I assume the same is true in the reverse. If you waste energy hating randos, as you do often with your toxic personal attack filled posts, then that is your issue - one which a physics degree (which gives you medical expertise somehow) will not fix.


That outbreak was an important visual representation that the Delta variant spreads a lot differently, including among the vaccinated, but it also showed that the vaccines do a great job preventing serious illness and death. The snowman guy posted it as a means of showing the vaccine was utterly useless with his sarcastic "aren't all hospital cases supposed to be unvaxxinated" reasoning, when that does not apply to this isolated mostly vaccinated gathering. As I said - its not like this was an outbreak in a Walmart of random people.


I like how you changed your personal attacks from the simplistic "idiot." That was a needed upgrade, and perhaps that happened as a result of a bit tighter modding.

Do you agree with snowman's interpretation of essentially "LOL vaccine is useless?" I notice that you tend to avoid debating or pointing out errors from people like him or vitamin D kid or heat wave guy for some reason, why is that?

This dataset is not representative of general human behavior these days. Not too many multi day parties with a ton of physical contact of a relatively narrow demographic in a very contained area. Ignoring that this event among mostly vaccinated would not happen with the new info of the delta variant, the fact is these people were in a level of contact with the same group of people that is pretty unique, so good luck comparing this data with an outbreak at a Walmart.

This showed the Delta variant is very transmissible among vaccinated people, which was already being explored, but sometimes an obvious visual example helps, and this does that. As to how effective it is at preventing hospitalizations and deaths, all you need to do is have a few hundred middle age unvaccinated dudes get together for a few days in a contained environment with an immense amount of physical contact and see how it plays out. I know which team I would bet on having better results, but if you believe it would be the same - sure.


You should definitely hire yourself after your constant glowing recommendations that you give of yourself, which is a common attribute of an individual that is extremely insecure. Your next trick is finding another human to agree with your praise of yourself. How has that search been?


Well, when you are done whining and feeling sorry for yourself you can decide if you are fully on team "Let it rip!" or not at this point. The motivations behind it do not matter - do you believe in it. You mention some concern about hospitals being overwhelmed, but that is just going to happen. What would you suggest be done when that happens - masks and restrictions? If people are going to live their life like they want as you suggest then that will result in hospitals being overwhelmed as is happening in the USA in lower vaccinated states. Kind of hard to have it both ways, and even an undergrad physics education (completed or not) will not help solve that human behavior issue.

I'm not putting any weight in that data. There is a lot of information we don't have, its a relatively small sample, and even if we had complete information it's an outlier for obvious reasons.

That said, I don't know why some can't just say something similar instead of trying to bend every data point as a vaccine success story.

Again, where does the data show this? Mods, this is proof of what an utterly worthless poster Monteroy is - he can't even put together, 3 long posts in, simple straightforward conclusions from what data says. Why keep the troll around?

Here (and for multiple posts) you're just totally confused and can't even keep up with the issues or what people are talking about. The issue here is not the rate of transmission - what we're seeing is comparable in the vaccinated around the world such as the UK - the issue is the relative effect of vaccines in prevention of transmission and severe cases.


This is your best self owning in the thread. That is exactly what happened here - there were hundreds of unvaccinated - and both the spread rates and PCR load rates were identical among the vaccinated and unvaccinated. Aha you will say. But some were vaccinated. And the answer to that is, lol. That doesn't matter to what the data shows; there are math and spread principles at work here that you're not grasping so you're saying silly things like the above.
But that is precisely what the data shows from this study. You spend so much time on empty trolling/politics posts that you can't even do basic analysis. Thus you have absolutely nothing to add to this thread in any way. That is why you post worthless posts and troll - there's no depth there.

You're not even rising to the level of a coherent conversation on a simple issue here. My position is completely explained and your further questions show no understanding of it.

Your post was so vacuous and so data-naive that even jaxeland can see your contributions here are utterly worthless now.

What data do we have in the US that's reliable? The government data is broken at this point, with skewed reporting resulting in absurdly false figures like 99.5% vaccination protection.

Yeah, it shows the intellectual bankruptcy of the vaccine fundamentalists. They have literally nothing to add to the discussion. Yours is a reasonable take although I do think a little weight should be put in this data.

I'm actually trying to find reliable (properly reported) data on vaccinated vs unvaccinated deaths and I'm just not getting there. Does anyone have anything?

Actually my sarcastic remark is because in Texas the "Department of State Health Services doesn’t track the number of COVID-19 hospitalizations among vaccinated people statewide because hospitals are not required to report that information to the state" and this is why you read bullshit propaganda about 99% of hospitalizations are unvaccinated people.

Now, now - we are supposed to be polite and not insult each other. Count to 10 next time - that may help or give yourself another glowing recommendation.

As per your "straight forward conclusions" - this thread is literally a breeding pit of people posting political based agendas disguised as actual insight, yourself included. That is fine - it is a rando thread on the internet inhabited by randos that will make no difference, so it is the place for that type of behavior, but in the real world the messaging needs to be clearer, recognizing that not every human is a world class medical expert due to taking physics 101, and the messaging has to be appropriate for that.


As I said - this example shows that it is quite transmissible among the vaccinated. Granted most people do not engage in 3+ day constant parties within a closed area, so one can say that is not particularly typical behavior, and that situation pretty much oversaturates the area with virus as a result.


Whenever you are willing to answer the simple yes or no question you keep avoiding let me know. You want people to live their own lives and make their own choices. I agree at this point, but I know that will respresent a huge increase in cases among the unvaccinated that require the use of medical services. Likely this will cause distress to those services, but I see it as the price to pay to move forward at this point. Do you or would you impose restrictions when that happens?

I am sure he will appreciate you speaking on his behalf with your back handed insult, but in the end one of the bigger issues with how this pandemic has been handled is the mixed messaging and the muddled interpretation of data that gets used and abused by fake experts. Safe to say - a lot of that has been seen in this thread and others like it on the internet. Case in point:

or a 'lack of success story' which it is being used as here.

If the overwhelming preponderance of evidence thus far was 'vaccines do not work' Toothsayer would be the first to call this study out in the way you have here, properly. He would hand wave it away with little consideration until further collaborated.

Instead, it is given extra weight, while at the same time the preponderance of evidence the other way is diminished as 'unreliable'. By saying that it makes a suggestion that this newer data is MORE reliable compared to the prior data going the other way, when it is not.

But more specifically Mod's this is an example of Toothsayer giving you the middle finger with regards to your recent request to tone down the insults.

If TS replies to me with this language, his absolute template since the beginnings of this thread with anyone who disagreed with him, he is going to get back the same and worse and the escalation will begin.

If TS has an issue with someone elses post that he thinks the Mods need to act on, he can report it but thinking his insult laden replies help and do not promote the 'tarding' up of this thread, he is ...wrong. (I actually changed the insulting word I was going to put there)

Regarding that concerning looking CDC case study data, I did a quick calculation on vaccination efficacies based on hypothetical vaccination rates of the population that visited these parties. Maybe someone in the US or with more insight into these parties and the demographics visiting them can come with a better estimate on the vaccination rate?

Anyway, I calculated for two scenarios: 90% vaccination rate and 70% vaccination rate. For 90% vaccination rate, the efficacy of vaccination to prevent infection is 69%. The efficacy to prevent hospitalization is 56%. For a 70% vaccination rate, infection efficacy is 6% and hospitalization efficacy is negative (-33%).

Obviously a big problem with these calculated (hypothetical) efficacies is the sample size, especially for hospitalizations.

According to a Rutgers study from early April with 1500 respondents:

A lower percentage of the LGBTQ community (42.1%
Homosexual; 41.3% Bisexual, Pansexual, or Queer) received
the vaccine as compared to 52.0% of Heterosexual
respondents.

https://bloustein.rutgers.edu/wp-con...n_US_May21.pdf
(Link auto downloads the PDF)


Surprising to see the LGBT's vaccinating at a lower rate.

I am not trying to bend everything as a vaccine success story. The vaccines are clearly less effective at stopping Delta infections than they were against Alpha. Israeli data also shows waning immunity especially among older people. These are both things that were not known earlier when it was all about how amazingly effective the vaccines were. And new variants could make the vaccines even less effective. We don't know.

None of which changes the fact that the vaccines are incredibly effective at preventing hospitalization and death from Covid, against current variants. So taking P-Town data and using as a gotcha to show vaccines don't work, when zero people died and 4 got sick enough to go to the hospital, is a very big leap. It is ignoring the mountains of real world data showing their effectiveness and safety.

The mainstream narrative is that the vaccines showed efficacy against hospitalizations and deaths in that dataset. Brian Stelter said it this morning. Its been said here and in OOT.

Many seem to have a view that the efficacy against delta is immutable. Which IMO couldn't be further from the truth.

5 in hospital and 0 deaths. yep useless

https://thehighwire.com/videos/live-...-in-dallas-tx/

Very long, interesting stuff. Starts about 11min in.

That seems like a site that has no agenda at all with the other recent titles including the following:

"RAND ROASTS FAUCI…AGAIN!"
“ABOUT HALF THE CASES ARE VACCINE FAILURES”
"BLAMING UNVAXXED FOR VACCINE FAILURE?"
"UK OFFICIAL ADMITS LOCKDOWNS FOR “SOCIAL CONTROL”
"Episode 225: THE COVID BLAME GAME"
"KNOCK, KNOCK! BIG BROTHER IS AT YOUR DOOR"
"BOOSTERS PROVING VACCINE ISN’T EFFECTIVE?"
"ABORTED FETAL TISSUE IN VACCINES"
"DO VACCINES CAUSE AUTISM?"

The all caps is always a nice touch, and for some reason all the pictures of Biden and Fauci and such are unflattering and small and placed low compared to other people to show inferiority. No doubt a coincidence.

Anyways, as long as this completely indifferent, agenda-free (and certainly not anti-vaxx) website is on board with team "Let it Rip!" then good job bringing them on, and help lock in a few others here who refuse to give as clear a commitment as you and I have thus far.