RAÏSanÏa
Member
Premium social media service access code(and flair sets) available with vaccine.
Better account visibility, tools and community access.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Premium social media service access code(and flair sets) available with vaccine.
Better account visibility, tools and community access.
Nobody_Important
“Aww, it’s so...average,” she said to him in a cold brick of passion
You have a better chance of being struck by lightning than having a severe side effect from any vaccine and you know it. Don't try and pretend I am ignorant of the astronomical possibilities of taking any kind of medication. Billions of different medications are consumed everyday on this rock. Almost all of which have a tiny tiny chance to give you some kind of bad side effect. Yet society still keeps trucking along just fine. A booster shot is not going to be any different or somehow more dangerous than the vaccine let alone any of the other stuff we shove into our bodies on a daily basis.
synchronicity
Member
This is not a comment on this covid discussion or you personally, so please take that into account.
I've always found it fascinating when anyone references this concept. Whenever it is used, there is an implication of inferiority (of intelligence frequently) being placed upon others - those who are not yourself. Of course the irony being that the very invoking of this concept could cause you belong to the very phenomenon for which you are categorizing others. It's, "You're stupid/incapable because you think you're smart, therefore I am smart." which of course can spin right back around.
I think we're all better off when we can listen to others who we may (strongly) disagree with, without an assumption that they are just lacking the same intelligence we believe ourselves to possess. Sometimes we're all wrong. Heck, humanity has *collectively* believed many erroneous things throughout history. Who's to say what we've got wrong in the present? We're better when we treat each other with respect, despite a sometimes great gulf in perspective.
Nobody_Important
“Aww, it’s so...average,” she said to him in a cold brick of passion
I saw that. It's been all over the news here. Typical hypocritical grifter like the rest of the people pushing anti-vax and anti-mask nonsense. Asshole says schools can't enforce masks, but if you look at the requirements to visit the governor's mansion one of the things listed is that masks are "strongly recommended".
Grifters. The lot of them.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
I don't see how outlawing government mandates makes him a hypocrite for having recommendations but ultimately leaving the decision up to the individual.
Nobody_Important
“Aww, it’s so...average,” she said to him in a cold brick of passion
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Yep. Definitely not hypocritical at all. No sir.
It's not, because the consistency lies in the leaving it up to individual choice. You can recommend something without requiring it.
Nobody_Important
“Aww, it’s so...average,” she said to him in a cold brick of passion
If you actually believe that masks were optional then I have a bridge to sell you.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
And I implore you to read the whole post because I addressed all of your points, even agreeing with you that the math wasn't as congruent as it could have been.
Nevertheless, Campbell was asked a question - Are the chances of getting long haul COVID lessened with the vaccine, and he answered yes, with a supporting dataset to justify that opinion. The additional novel sized information I provided was to give additional support to that conclusion.
These are important questions that require lots of information to answer. You're tired of having to just accept people telling you what to do like good little boys and girls, and I empathize with that feeling because I also feel similarly. This is why I am also showing the work for your benefit so please don't dismiss it so easily.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
I can't comprehend your defense of how he presented that argument. It was wildly disingenuous. He tried to make it look like the vaccine had a protective effect against developing long COVID on top of any efficacy it has to prevent infection outright when the data actually shows that, if infected, the chances of developing long-term symptoms appears to be just about the same at 19%.
In the video, he literally said that your chances of getting Long COVID go from around 10 ~ 20% all the way down to about 0.4% if you're vaccinated, but that's pure rubbish and full of faulty assumptions, namely 1) that only 2.6% of fully vaccinated people will ever catch COVID and 2) that every single unvaccinated person will catch COVID.
People just need to accept , that measures are part of our life in the near future , Israel is doing pretty bad, and 60% in the hospital over there is fully vaccinated , people who got their shots in January show reduced effectiveness of the Pfizer jabs. We need to change our habits .
Even if they vaccinated with boosters they would still overrun hospitals.
It’s starting to look like our jabs need to be renewed ever 4 months
Even if they vaccinated with boosters they would still overrun hospitals.
It’s starting to look like our jabs need to be renewed ever 4 months
Last edited:
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Do you think this is always the case? That there can never be a time when this concept can be referenced in a completely benign way? I'm sure there are many cases where ill-informed people ironically reference this, but that doesn't mean it always happens. This is an actual documented phenomenon. Just because it's possible someone's using it wrong, doesn't mean it's always going to happen. luckily, there's a way to determine which is which.
Humans have been wrong about many a thing, yes. We might be wrong about stuff in the present too. Does that mean we can never be maximally certain about a given thing? No. There's methods of investigation and verification we can use, and those methods have only gotten stronger with the passage of time.
Ben Shapiro once famously said, "Facts don't care about your feelings". That's actually a good way to get a sense of where the truth lies. Who is basing their opinion on empirical evidence and who is basing their opinion on instinct and feelings?
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
I think this is true when it comes to opinions, but someone can definitely not have the required knowledge of the concepts they are using.
Your opinion can still be right though either through blind luck or an innate subconscious understanding of the underlying principles.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
He presented the argument within the context of that study, fully acknowledging the gaps in data. He didn't necessarily say more than what the paper showed - that out of 1,497 positive vaccinated people, 7 got long COVID.
I agreed with you that it's not a perfect comparison, especially given the denominator issue, but ultimately you're still going to see a protective affect against long COVID if you're vaccinated. I don't know where the 10-20% is coming from, so as I said before, I can't really speak to that.
In order to provide additional context on how that isn't wrong, I cited many other studies that and quoted other practicing doctors about how long COVID in vaccinated people is exceedingly rare. I even cited one that takes care of your issue with the denominator.
In fact, here's another one that addresses your denominator problem:
At a conservative estimate, 15 million divided by 333,188,423 Americans in 2021 is 4.5%, which is still greater than 0.4%.
CherryFalls
Banned
According to the trials, this shouldn't be a worry https://www.healthline.com/health-n...nt-matter-whether-you-had-side-effects-or-not
synchronicity
Member
The essence of my point is that we (humans, generally speaking) often find ourselves in a position where we are *convinced* and that certainty can create blind spots. It's difficult to shift perspectives or see things from different angles if you already know that you "know". And that same certainty in our position(s) most surely often damages any potential for meaningful dialogue because of how we view others. Arrogance/superiority (no fingers pointed at you or anyone specific) rarely, if ever, benefits anyone. We're, all of us - intelligence, finances, career, life circumstances aside - looking to live the best lives we can, and of course we are all incorrect at times, but we're better off as a collective when we treat one another with respect, even if we're "certain" that we're dealing with "fools".
Last edited:
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Does that mean you no longer think that the vaccines aren't particularly good at preventing delta infection?
It is not accurate that "they clearly are not blocking infection very well in the real world".
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
I got the essence of your point. The only specific areas of your post that I wanted to pushback on were
1. That the reference of that effect is always a tell that the invoker is also suffering from the same thing. He/she could be, but not necessarily.
2. That the reference of that effect is a sign of disrespect. It could be used disrespectfully, but it also could be used accurately. This isn't on the same level as Godwin's Law.
It’s starting to look like it , Israel is imposing almost all measures again , ( they are well vaccinated) the rest of the world is lagging 3 - 4 months behind and we are going into fall, which is basically the start of virus season..
Toons
Member
I say, GOOD.
Why should anyone who puts their own personal arbitary convenience over the better health of those around them in a virus pandemic by refusing to vaccinate, then be allowed to serve on the behalf of the greater populace and make decisions on their behalf?
They are displaying clearly by their action they are not concerned with anyone more than themselves, why even want work in government with that mindset? Because that's what government is supposed to do.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Yes, cases are rising in Israel, but it's not because the vaccines aren't good at preventing infection.
Delta is much more infectious than previous variants, yet their current wave is still only about the same as previous waves of less infectious variants. Of course, the data is not completely congruent since there are differences in restrictions and regulations at those different time periods, as well as differences in natural immunity among the populace too. However, when you also look at the current per capita infection rate of the vaccinated population vs the unvaccinated population, you can see that the unvaccinated are getting infected at a much larger rate, which would indicate that the vaccinations are still good at preventing infection.
RAÏSanÏa
Member
Joseph Boot
Profile:Christian thinker, Presidernt of the Ezra Institute
Author of The Mission of God - Western civilization is facing an epochal turning point. We have erroneously assumed that our social order could remain stable and flourish without its foundation of God’s Word for private and public life.
He definitely has the best interest for his religious grift and its promulgation in mind, not public health policy.
Ford is looking out for all constituents and promoting health and safety. Boot just wants Jesus(his interpretation of Jesus, specifically) to guide policy.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
No, but they were better at blocking the Alpha variant and original wild incarnation. Or it's just a function of time and waning efficacy, I'm not sure.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
No they aren't good at preventing delta infection but they were better at blocking original COVID, or No they are good at preventing delta infection but they were better blocking original COVID?
It's still a little unclear.
synchronicity
Member
1. No of course not. If we are to accept the idea of positions being "correct" then someone can be "right".
2. To minimize others is, in my view, inherently disrespectful. We're all experiencing existence differently to varying degrees. To make a suggestion that another is ignorant undermines the variability of experience. I'm going to run the risk of going too far down an epistemological rabbit hole here, but there is an implicit trust by most of us that what we experience is "real" or "true". Even within the context of science, there is a leap of faith (ironically - I'm not religious, fwiw) that our senses are capable of being an arbiter of absolute "truth". I'm not saying science has no value - airplanes do fly, after all. I'm going to veer too far off into a tangent if I'm not careful. I don't want to derail this thread unnecessarily. Let me just say that in my own experience, I find no justification to belittle another's point of view. I may not be able to relate. It may make no sense to me. I may find it flat out wrong, but I cannot invalidate something I have not experienced. Of course I often find others misguided or wrong on some level, but I won't tell anyone else what they "know" or don't know. I only know what I experience through my own point of contact with existence. So (for me) it is disrespectful to suggest that someone who see's things differently is somehow less than I am. I hope that clarifies. Please let's not take this into a long tangent. And to be perfectly honest, I've been a hypocrite in this regard many times in my own past, looking down on or directly denigrating others for different perspectives - justified or no.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
They are not good at protecting infection against Delta and their effectiveness declines over time. It's unclear how good they would have been against Alpha or the original after the same amount of time elapsed.
This is now the official position of the American CDC, by the way.
"Vaccine induced protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection begins to decrease over time." "Vaccine effectiveness is generally decreased against the Delta variant." "Vaccine effectiveness against severe disease, hospitalization, and death, remains relatively high." (language toned down dramatically in that one)
Last edited by a moderator:
RAÏSanÏa
Member
Not a chance.
This has to do with what is under purview of the political party and its members. A few parties are doing this to show they aren't antivaxxers nor connected to that movement at all.
There might be mandatory testing to allow those officials that can't or won't be vaxxed access to essential spaces such as the legislature buildings and allow the public to have some confidence they are not at risk.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
What level of effectiveness is considered good in your opinion?
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
For me, personally, it would have to be very high (probably in the realm of the original Pfizer estimates) to even consider getting the shot given my risk profile. I think if other people want to get the vaccine even with this new information, they should be welcome to do so, but requiring it to participate in society after all of this? Madness.
Let me just remind everyone that this was only 4 months ago. This was common knowledge throughout April and May.
To me, this just highlights the extreme importance of long-term trials especially before any talk of requirements or mandates *ever* enters the conversation.
I'm willing to forgive for the mistakes and the errors of judgment given this was an emergent situation, but we need to pump the goddamn brakes in light of those errors rather than just closing our eyes and plugging our ears to reality before slamming the pedal to the metal and blasting full speed ahead with all of these insane and desperate policies.
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
The error was in the framing by the director. There was no error I'm pushing for or continuing to push for vaccination. The same article includes the actual data and push back from scientists and the CDC itself on the blanket statement.
Science messaging often falls foul of either giving the complete picture and confusing people or giving a broad strokes overview that over or under states the case.
DeepBreath87
Banned
No. What they said wasn’t an issue of framing. They said vaccinated people don’t get sick. Don’t carry the virus. That statement has proven to be false. That is just the fact of the matter. They completely spoke out of turn. Either they didn’t have enough data to make that statement or they were lying to push vaccination. Either way, what they said merely 4 months ago has turned out to be false.
Toons
Member
And yet the statement that vaccination is unequivocally and unanimously a better chance for ones health remains the case with even more and more evidence piling on. At one point does it become not about who said what, but what the data is clearly showing?
Jaysen
Banned
For these people, it’s always been about the who.
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
The CDC had the data that said that vaccinated people can get sick and can carry the virus, but at much lower rates, and they presented as such. She as the guest on a show said the wrong thing as she grossly oversimplified the analysis. Given the target audience maybe she was justified /s. This wasn't an official statement, wasn't a press release etc it was just a dumb simplification in an interview, one that was effectively retracted immediately. This did not guide policy, so I fail to see how it is anything of significance.
Last edited:
sackings
Member
I could say the same about ivermectin and therapeutic usage. Something John Campbell actually agrees with, FWIW
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
IT DID NOT GUIDE POLICY?! Am I taking crazy pills?!
Did you just totally memory hole the fact that the CDC put out official guidance (in May, was it?) that the vaccinated no longer have to wear masks indoors precisely because they do not spread the virus?
It was not a case of poor messaging. This was their stance. Their policy. Their official messaging that propagated through the media and online discussion. It was commonly accepted knowledge until just a little while ago. It was not even a month ago that most of America was shocked to learn that the fully vaccinated could and did get infected by Delta and spread it to others.
Last edited by a moderator:
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
Did not spread the virus as much, not did not spread it at all. That guidance was sound and is still pretty much sound - unless you are one of the people who thinks that the only acceptable policy is one with zero risk. Are you actually arguing for universal masking?
DeepBreath87
Banned
Jesus. You people are desperate to have an argument with yourselves at this point. I didn’t say vaccination wasn’t beneficial. Follow along slowly. The CDC director said, unambiguously, that vaccinated people do not get sick, do not carry the virus. What she said had proven to be false literally a few months later.
Now, we are trying to convince resistant people to get the shots, are we not? You understand people will point to this kind of stuff and say “see, these people don’t know what they’re talking about”. Of course you’ll just belittle them because vaccination=good to you, but it doesn’t to them. In order to convince them to get vaccinated, you have to build trust that we both know what we are doing with these vaccines and are completely honest about them in all aspects. Stuff like this undermines that trust. You cannot go out in public saying things that turn out to be completely wrong like 3-4 months later, and convince hesitant people you know what you’re doing.
It can’t be “oh well, we were mostly right.” The consequences of this stuff actually matter. There is nothing wrong with hedging a bit. “Based on current data we believe” goes a long way.
Obviously, another issue is going to be convincing people who haven’t got one shot to get them now that we are already pushing for a third. It also complicates the mandates. I got two shots. If I refuse to get a third (which I won’t, but for arguments sake), how long before I can’t go to dinner or I lose my job? This is such a fluid situation and yet we’re making all these consequential decisions based on changing understanding of all this stuff.
Last edited:
Ixion
Member
I'm not getting the vaccine as of now, and here's why:
I've had chronic health issues for the last 6 or so years (weak/painful hands and feet, among other things), which have been diagnosed as all sorts of different things by different doctors. Lyme disease, fibre-myalgia, "some type of autoimmune issue", "definitely not an autoimmune issue", and so on. I've heard it all, and yet I never got a firm diagnosis.
To add another layer on top of this, I was kind of down about my situation 2 to 3 years ago. My primary doctor suggested I take anti-depressants. I rejected him. Now two years later, after making some life changes, creating my own tailored exercise routine, etc, I'm in a good place mentally and a decent place physically.
So to summarize, I have a chronic but unknown issue, and I'm now at the point where I actually feel OK about myself, and now I have to be forced to take a relatively experimental vaccine in order to participate in society? I live in New York by the way, which now has vaccine passports.
Recommending/encouraging the vaccine with clear and accurate messaging is what should be done, but these authoritarian measures are too far.
I've had chronic health issues for the last 6 or so years (weak/painful hands and feet, among other things), which have been diagnosed as all sorts of different things by different doctors. Lyme disease, fibre-myalgia, "some type of autoimmune issue", "definitely not an autoimmune issue", and so on. I've heard it all, and yet I never got a firm diagnosis.
To add another layer on top of this, I was kind of down about my situation 2 to 3 years ago. My primary doctor suggested I take anti-depressants. I rejected him. Now two years later, after making some life changes, creating my own tailored exercise routine, etc, I'm in a good place mentally and a decent place physically.
So to summarize, I have a chronic but unknown issue, and I'm now at the point where I actually feel OK about myself, and now I have to be forced to take a relatively experimental vaccine in order to participate in society? I live in New York by the way, which now has vaccine passports.
Recommending/encouraging the vaccine with clear and accurate messaging is what should be done, but these authoritarian measures are too far.
I’m just shocked how many people are ok with the authoritarian shit going on in, this is bigger than a damn vaccine and it will be too late and will bite each and everyone one of us in the ass.
Where is the aclu and other groups??? Where are the people yelling fascism and nazis about every little thing??
Has antifa rioted once about the actual fascism going on?? ANTIFA you are fired!
Where is the aclu and other groups??? Where are the people yelling fascism and nazis about every little thing??
Has antifa rioted once about the actual fascism going on?? ANTIFA you are fired!
Last edited:
One of these seems out of place:
Well done Australian media ...
Context: A Jewish family held an "unauthorised" engagement party over the weekend. Video of said "unauthorised gathering" went viral on social media. Media, politicians and police fanned the flames of frustration. Moron racists in the community took it one step further with anti-Semitism.
Well done Australian media ...
Context: A Jewish family held an "unauthorised" engagement party over the weekend. Video of said "unauthorised gathering" went viral on social media. Media, politicians and police fanned the flames of frustration. Moron racists in the community took it one step further with anti-Semitism.
Last edited:
DeepBreath87
Banned
As with most things for the screechers, all the Nazi accusations were just projection.
ManaByte
Gold Member
California becomes 1st state to require proof of COVID vaccination or negative test for indoor events over 1,000 people
California will require proof of vaccination or a negative coronavirus test to attend indoor gatherings of 1,000 or more people starting next month, a move the state says is the first of its kind i…
ktla.com
Nobody_Important
“Aww, it’s so...average,” she said to him in a cold brick of passion
Imagine being this fucking stupid lol