Coronavirus COVID-19

Political discussions
User avatar
AZGrizFan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 59959
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
Location: Just to the right of center

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by AZGrizFan »

JohnStOnge wrote: Mon Aug 22, 2022 6:27 pm
BDKJMU wrote: Mon Aug 22, 2022 9:13 am The worst and most destructive bureaucrat in US history, and with the highest paid govt employee in US history, has announced he is retiring in Dec. How convenient before the conks take over at least the House. They can still subpoena his ass before hearings to answer for his lies and disasterous policies..
The guy just did his job. People asked him what he thought and he said what he thought at the time. The demonization of this guy by nut jobs on the right has been just awful.
Oh yeah. He’s a fucking saint.
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Image
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by SeattleGriz »

JohnStOnge wrote: Mon Aug 22, 2022 6:20 pm
AZGrizFan wrote: Mon Aug 22, 2022 2:32 pm

Why is it ridiculous? Why is there a spike in deaths 28-45? You have another answer?
See other another answer in the article i linked in the post just after the one you quoted (https://www.reuters.com/article/factche ... SL2N2VS1BI).
“There is no way to attribute the increase to vaccination or any single specific cause,” NCHS said. “That said, the large increase in COVID deaths (and total deaths) for the latter part of 2021 does coincide with the Delta and Omicron waves.”

Kyle Sheldrick, a medical doctor and researcher, also debunked the video in a Twitter thread (here). Sheldrick explains how Dowd and the unidentified man who examined the data created their graph using CDC data (here), and points to the spread of the dangerous Delta variant as the more likely reason for spikes in deaths in the second half of 2021.
The possibility of adverse events caused by the vaccines is being very closely monitored. In fact the monitoring is causing problems because we have people misinterpreting what is going on with the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System. They are looking at adverse events that occur after vaccination and looking to see if it looks like there is an association such that a given adverse event (including death) proportionately occurs more often among people who got vaccinated than it occurs in the general population. When it happens, such as is the case with the Johnson & Johnson vaccine and blood clotting, they report it.
This is a flat out lie. They are not monitoring for adverse events. If they were, the CDC would have produced the 51 and counting safety signal reports from VAERS. They have produced zero reports.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by SeattleGriz »

JohnStOnge wrote: Mon Aug 22, 2022 5:21 pm
SeattleGriz wrote: Sun Aug 21, 2022 2:46 pm

This statement here shows without a doubt how clueless you are on this subject. To pull your silly semantic game over a very commonly understood term and concept is quite laughable. Which field do you suppose the term originated?

The MMWR is not peer reviewed and your link is back from Mar of 2021.
It is not a semantic trick. If one is going to define "leaky vaccine" as a vaccine that does not prevent infection, one needs to understand that no vaccine is 100% effective in preventing infection. So the next question is: At what point does the % effectiveness get low enough for us to call it "leaky?"

And, really, the question isn't whether it is "leaky" or not. It's a function involving the infectiousness of the agent, the efficacy of the vaccine, and the vaccination rate.

When we first started this thing and we were dealing with a virus with R0 = around 3, the efficacy of the vaccine in terms of infection could have been reducing the risk of infection by 70% if we got a 96% vaccination rate. Or it could be 75% if we got an 89% vaccination rate.

That's based on a very simple model but that's the idea. The point is that it's not as simple as "the vaccine allows infections so it can't work to control the epidemic or pandemic."

Also, the vaccine is just one tool in trying to get the reproductive rate down. So the fact that you don't get the reproductive rate down to 1 using the vaccine alone does not mean you need to fail. The vaccine can be one contributing factor if you are also doing other things.
Maybe you should read up on the topic instead of arguing a point NOBODY makes in the industry. If you don't grasp sterilizing isn't used in it's strictest sense, you'll never understand. Good luck changing the whole industry because you don't like how a word is used.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by SeattleGriz »

JohnStOnge wrote: Mon Aug 22, 2022 6:27 pm
BDKJMU wrote: Mon Aug 22, 2022 9:13 am The worst and most destructive bureaucrat in US history, and with the highest paid govt employee in US history, has announced he is retiring in Dec. How convenient before the conks take over at least the House. They can still subpoena his ass before hearings to answer for his lies and disasterous policies..
The guy just did his job. People asked him what he thought and he said what he thought at the time. The demonization of this guy by nut jobs on the right has been just awful.
Hmm. Fauci out. Birx out. Redfield out, Collins out, Heads of vaccine division out and Walenski retooling the CDC.

Usually when large swaths of connected people leave, it's for a reason. Fauci replaced science with political science.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by SeattleGriz »

JohnStOnge wrote: Mon Aug 22, 2022 5:37 pm
SeattleGriz wrote: Sun Aug 21, 2022 2:49 pm

Let's save some time here. How about you tell me when the last respiratory (cold/flu/Covid) was in which we said, "thank goodness the vaccine ended this pandemic".
There are no cold vaccines. The influenza vaccination rate has typically been under 60%. The maximum over the past 11 influenza season was 63.7%.

The question is: When you say vaccination has never stopped a respiratory virus, do you have an example of a case in which there was an effort to do so, the vaccine reduced the risk of infection, and a vaccination rate of at least 90% was achieved?

The point is that saying "it's never worked" loses some umpgh when one notes that it's never really been implemented.
Thanks for restating what I said. We don't have the capability.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by SeattleGriz »

Now that we are seeing wholesale jersey switching, how long until this is Trump's fault? I mean what does a person say that was all for lockdowns and vaccine mandates, when they now realize they were wrong? You lie and say Trump deceived you. It was his fault.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/08/2 ... s-00053428
The Trump administration pressured the Food and Drug Administration, including former FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn, to authorize unproven treatments for Covid-19 and the first Covid-19 vaccines on an accelerated timeline, according to a report released Wednesday by Democrats on the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
GannonFan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 18038
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
I am a fan of: Delaware
A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by GannonFan »

SeattleGriz wrote: Wed Aug 24, 2022 3:56 pm Now that we are seeing wholesale jersey switching, how long until this is Trump's fault? I mean what does a person say that was all for lockdowns and vaccine mandates, when they now realize they were wrong? You lie and say Trump deceived you. It was his fault.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/08/2 ... s-00053428
The Trump administration pressured the Food and Drug Administration, including former FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn, to authorize unproven treatments for Covid-19 and the first Covid-19 vaccines on an accelerated timeline, according to a report released Wednesday by Democrats on the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis.
I haven't heard anyone who's been pro-lockdowns and pro-vaccines to in any way reverse and say those were wrong. Clearly the extent of and the duration of the lockdowns were obviously wrong. As for the vaccine mandates, I still think they could be worthwhile, depending on the setting and depending on where we get to with vaccines relative to the virus in circulation. Certainly mandating the vaccine that's out there now (the one for the Delta variant) makes no sense with Delta pretty much pushed out by Omicron variants, but at some time we can probably get a vaccine that matches the variant. But also, since all of this is political, the chances of people reversing their opinions are probably unlikely.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by JohnStOnge »

SeattleGriz wrote: Tue Aug 23, 2022 7:25 am
JohnStOnge wrote: Mon Aug 22, 2022 6:20 pm

See other another answer in the article i linked in the post just after the one you quoted (https://www.reuters.com/article/factche ... SL2N2VS1BI).



The possibility of adverse events caused by the vaccines is being very closely monitored. In fact the monitoring is causing problems because we have people misinterpreting what is going on with the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System. They are looking at adverse events that occur after vaccination and looking to see if it looks like there is an association such that a given adverse event (including death) proportionately occurs more often among people who got vaccinated than it occurs in the general population. When it happens, such as is the case with the Johnson & Johnson vaccine and blood clotting, they report it.
This is a flat out lie. They are not monitoring for adverse events. If they were, the CDC would have produced the 51 and counting safety signal reports from VAERS. They have produced zero reports.
Go ahead and provide a link giving details as to what you are alleging about "safety signal reports" so I can comment on it. They are monitoring for adverse events. That is what the adverse events reporting system is.

i strongly suspect that you are tapped into misinformation sites and that's where a lot of your stuff comes from. If they had identified any serious adverse events such as those with the Johnson and Johnson vaccine that had possibly been caused by the vaccines, you would know about it (like you know about what happened with the Johnson and Johnson vaccine).

BTW, here is one independent analysis of VAERS data; https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10 ... 70599/full

Bottom line:
The most frequent AEs reported among the three COVID-19 vaccines were relatively mild effects such as headache (17.5% of all reports), pyrexia (14.8%), fatigue (14.6%), and chills (12.7%). More severe AEs that were significantly enriched in at least one COVID-19 vaccine occurred at relatively low frequencies. For instance, myocarditis, which was enriched in the Pfizer vaccine, had 1,542 VAERS case reports for the Pfizer vaccine. Similarly, thrombosis, which was enriched in the Pfizer and Janssen vaccines, had a case report frequency of 1,737 for Pfizer and 1,004 for Janssen. It is worthy to note that myocarditis and thrombosis have also been associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Studies have found that the risk of myocarditis, pericarditis, cardiac arrhythmias, thrombocytopenia, and thromboembolism is much greater after SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to after COVID-19 vaccination (Hippisley-Cox et al., 2021; Patone et al., 2021). While our VAERS case report analysis has identified signals and alarms for possible adverse events associated with COVID-19 vaccines, the existing COVID-19 vaccines are generally very safe and the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks.
Yes, it is being monitored. Listen, SG, I don't know who the hell you are listening to with all your stuff. But you need to stop listening to them.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by SeattleGriz »

JohnStOnge wrote: Wed Aug 24, 2022 6:35 pm
SeattleGriz wrote: Tue Aug 23, 2022 7:25 am

This is a flat out lie. They are not monitoring for adverse events. If they were, the CDC would have produced the 51 and counting safety signal reports from VAERS. They have produced zero reports.
Go ahead and provide a link giving details as to what you are alleging about "safety signal reports" so I can comment on it. They are monitoring for adverse events. That is what the adverse events reporting system is.

i strongly suspect that you are tapped into misinformation sites and that's where a lot of your stuff comes from. If they had identified any serious adverse events such as those with the Johnson and Johnson vaccine that had possibly been caused by the vaccines, you would know about it (like you know about what happened with the Johnson and Johnson vaccine).

BTW, here is one independent analysis of VAERS data; https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10 ... 70599/full

Bottom line:
The most frequent AEs reported among the three COVID-19 vaccines were relatively mild effects such as headache (17.5% of all reports), pyrexia (14.8%), fatigue (14.6%), and chills (12.7%). More severe AEs that were significantly enriched in at least one COVID-19 vaccine occurred at relatively low frequencies. For instance, myocarditis, which was enriched in the Pfizer vaccine, had 1,542 VAERS case reports for the Pfizer vaccine. Similarly, thrombosis, which was enriched in the Pfizer and Janssen vaccines, had a case report frequency of 1,737 for Pfizer and 1,004 for Janssen. It is worthy to note that myocarditis and thrombosis have also been associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Studies have found that the risk of myocarditis, pericarditis, cardiac arrhythmias, thrombocytopenia, and thromboembolism is much greater after SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to after COVID-19 vaccination (Hippisley-Cox et al., 2021; Patone et al., 2021). While our VAERS case report analysis has identified signals and alarms for possible adverse events associated with COVID-19 vaccines, the existing COVID-19 vaccines are generally very safe and the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks.
Yes, it is being monitored. Listen, SG, I don't know who the hell you are listening to with all your stuff. But you need to stop listening to them.
FOIA proves they were not performing the safety signal reports on VAERS.
Since CDC officials stated publicly that “COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring is the most robust in U.S. history,” I had assumed that at the very least, CDC officials were monitoring VAERS using the methods they described in a briefing document posted on the CDC website in January 2021 (and updated in February 2022, with minor changes).

I was wrong.

The lynchpin of their safety monitoring was to mine VAERS data for safety signals by calculating what are known as proportional reporting ratios (PRRs).
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defe ... ne-safety/
CDC Admits It Never Monitored VAERS for COVID Vaccine Safety Signals
And here we go again. I say the CDC isn't doing work they were supposed to do and you give me a link to someone OTHER than the CDC. Plus remember, you incorrectly stated VAERS was full of regular people putting information in there.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by JohnStOnge »

SeattleGriz wrote: Tue Aug 23, 2022 7:33 am
JohnStOnge wrote: Mon Aug 22, 2022 5:21 pm

It is not a semantic trick. If one is going to define "leaky vaccine" as a vaccine that does not prevent infection, one needs to understand that no vaccine is 100% effective in preventing infection. So the next question is: At what point does the % effectiveness get low enough for us to call it "leaky?"

And, really, the question isn't whether it is "leaky" or not. It's a function involving the infectiousness of the agent, the efficacy of the vaccine, and the vaccination rate.

When we first started this thing and we were dealing with a virus with R0 = around 3, the efficacy of the vaccine in terms of infection could have been reducing the risk of infection by 70% if we got a 96% vaccination rate. Or it could be 75% if we got an 89% vaccination rate.

That's based on a very simple model but that's the idea. The point is that it's not as simple as "the vaccine allows infections so it can't work to control the epidemic or pandemic."

Also, the vaccine is just one tool in trying to get the reproductive rate down. So the fact that you don't get the reproductive rate down to 1 using the vaccine alone does not mean you need to fail. The vaccine can be one contributing factor if you are also doing other things.
Maybe you should read up on the topic instead of arguing a point NOBODY makes in the industry. If you don't grasp sterilizing isn't used in it's strictest sense, you'll never understand. Good luck changing the whole industry because you don't like how a word is used.
I have read up on it. I understand that if "sterilizing immunity vaccine" is used in its strictest sense, there is no such thing. The measles vaccine, for example, is referenced as one. But the measles vaccine is 93% effective against measles. You can get the measles vaccine and still get infected.

None of that matters. When you are looking at an epidemic, the question isn't whether the vaccine is "sterilizing" or not. The question is multi-factor. It involves how contagious the disease is, how effective the vaccine is, and how high a percentage of the population gets vaccinated.

The reason we don't see measles much is because the vaccine is 93% effective and we have around a 90% vaccination rate (depending on year). But you can see from news reports that we can still have problems when people avoid vaccination.

So what is the percent effectiveness would you cite as meaning a vaccine offers "sterilizing" immunity? Does the measles vaccine make your cut at 93% effectiveness?
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by SeattleGriz »

JohnStOnge wrote: Wed Aug 24, 2022 7:02 pm
SeattleGriz wrote: Tue Aug 23, 2022 7:33 am

Maybe you should read up on the topic instead of arguing a point NOBODY makes in the industry. If you don't grasp sterilizing isn't used in it's strictest sense, you'll never understand. Good luck changing the whole industry because you don't like how a word is used.
I have read up on it. I understand that if "sterilizing immunity vaccine" is used in its strictest sense, there is no such thing. The measles vaccine, for example, is referenced as one. But the measles vaccine is 93% effective against measles. You can get the measles vaccine and still get infected.

None of that matters. When you are looking at an epidemic, the question isn't whether the vaccine is "sterilizing" or not. The question is multi-factor. It involves how contagious the disease is, how effective the vaccine is, and how high a percentage of the population gets vaccinated.

The reason we don't see measles much is because the vaccine is 93% effective and we have around a 90% vaccination rate (depending on year). But you can see from news reports that we can still have problems when people avoid vaccination.

So what is the percent effectiveness would you cite as meaning a vaccine offers "sterilizing" immunity? Does the measles vaccine make your cut at 93% effectiveness?
:ohno: Sterilizing means that you are stopping a virus before it goes on to fully infect a person. Of course there are always going to be breakthroughs.

Why do you think I was talking about vaccines you could inhale and train your mucosal IgA? The vaccines skip that step due to injection and miss a big part of the immunes defenses. If they had a whole attenuated virus vaccine you could inhale, I'd be totally fine with that. I'm not cool with a vaccine AND a LNP nasal shot though. Make it a one stop shop.

Article below is discussing what I'm talking about and how it helps sterilization.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciimmunol.add9947
The early and striking success of the initial COVID-19 vaccines led many to believe that this shot strategy would ultimately achieve global containment. Had the virus not evolved to its current strains, that might have been possible. However, now we have a global surge of Omicron BA.5 that is occurring, in large part, because of our inability to block infections and transmission.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by SeattleGriz »

Guess what?! If I want to get the new BA5/Original strain bivalent booster, I can't. Gotta get two of the original strain shots first!! :lol:

Maybe StOnge will explain that science to me.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by SeattleGriz »

GannonFan wrote: Wed Aug 24, 2022 4:44 pm
SeattleGriz wrote: Wed Aug 24, 2022 3:56 pm Now that we are seeing wholesale jersey switching, how long until this is Trump's fault? I mean what does a person say that was all for lockdowns and vaccine mandates, when they now realize they were wrong? You lie and say Trump deceived you. It was his fault.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/08/2 ... s-00053428

I haven't heard anyone who's been pro-lockdowns and pro-vaccines to in any way reverse and say those were wrong. Clearly the extent of and the duration of the lockdowns were obviously wrong. As for the vaccine mandates, I still think they could be worthwhile, depending on the setting and depending on where we get to with vaccines relative to the virus in circulation. Certainly mandating the vaccine that's out there now (the one for the Delta variant) makes no sense with Delta pretty much pushed out by Omicron variants, but at some time we can probably get a vaccine that matches the variant. But also, since all of this is political, the chances of people reversing their opinions are probably unlikely.
It's mostly happening with the people on Twitter, like Dr Leana Wen and other "influencers" like her, in addition Dr Birx has changed her tune quite a bit. They are trying the "science changed" right now, but that won't hold up.

It'll become more pronounced and that is why Trump will become the scapegoat. Have to blame someone to cover for their nastiness.

While Fauci wasn't nasty, he is backtracking on his advocating for closing down everything. Listen to his "I didn't shut down anything". No you didn't, but you called for it over and over.

Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by SeattleGriz »

Hey StOnge. Thought you researched original antigenic sin and told me I was quoting old science that fell out of favor years ago. Science magazine is trotting it out to explain why the new Omicron booster, did nothing extra than the regular boosters.

As I've said before, this happens to bad first time infections and not just vaccines. What this tells me, is they made the vaccines a little too powerful. Trained the immune system a little too hard. Hell, so hard it's giving kids that take it, myocarditis.

https://www.science.org/content/blog-po ... igenic-sin
BACK TO IN THE PIPELINE
IN THE PIPELINE
Omicron Boosters and Original Antigenic Sin
We've had some interesting vaccine news in the last few days, and it's worth a closer look. A team from the NIAID, Emory, Moderna (and others) has reported results in a primate model for an Omicron-targeted mRNA booster shot that they've been working on, and the numbers are. . .a bit surprising. Macaque monkeys were dosed twice, four weeks apart, with the standard Moderna coronavirus vaccine, and then 41 weeks later one group of them got a booster of the same shot, while another got a booster of the new one with an Omicron variant sequence. Subsequent tests for neutralizing antibody levels, B-cell expansion, and response to a challenge with the Omicron virus itself showed that there was no difference between the two treatments at all.

It's important to say right up front that both vaccine regimens did a strong job of protecting the test animals - strong enough that both groups of monkeys were pretty much completely protected in the lungs during the challenge study, which in its way makes comparison at that point a bit difficult (protection in the upper airway was strong, but less complete, as it is in humans). So I hope that people don't get confused as this news gets out into thinking that the Omicron-focused booster did nothing. It worked fine; it's just that it brought nothing extra compared to the regular booster. The animals showed waning antibody titers during the nine-month interval until the booster, and either one of the boosters brought those back up very strongly (and in fact to levels higher than they ever were). But that said, you'd have thought that there would have been some difference. After all, these vaccines are raising antibodies to a sequence of the viral spike protein, and Omicron has a whole list of mutations in that protein compared to Delta or the earlier variants, and these were incorporated into the sequence of this booster candidate. But with either booster, antibodies were raised with very similar specificities to the Spike protein's receptor-binding domain.

The authors believe that this is most likely due to the phenomenon known (catchily) as "original antigenic sin", or less rousingly, antibody imprinting.
Last edited by SeattleGriz on Thu Aug 25, 2022 7:12 am, edited 2 times in total.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by SeattleGriz »

Here you go. The variant factories were those that couldn't clear the virus, which simply means all those that had poorly functioning immune systems. Another falsehood dies. How many times did the media call the unvaccinated "variant factories"? There were even some on this board who used the phrase.

https://www-news--medical-net.cdn.amppr ... shows.aspx
The coronavirus variants of concern are emerging from chronic, long-term COVID infections in people who may be immune comprised and unable to clear the virus, a new study strongly suggests. Frontiers in Virology published the findings by scientists at Emory University and the University of Oxford.

"Rather than evolving from transmission chains of acute COVID infections in hundreds of millions of people, our results show that the variants of concern come from rare cases when someone may have an active infection for months," says Daniel Weissman, a corresponding author and Emory professor of biology and physics focused on quantitative evolutionary theory.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by JohnStOnge »

SeattleGriz wrote: Wed Aug 24, 2022 6:50 pm
JohnStOnge wrote: Wed Aug 24, 2022 6:35 pm

Go ahead and provide a link giving details as to what you are alleging about "safety signal reports" so I can comment on it. They are monitoring for adverse events. That is what the adverse events reporting system is.

i strongly suspect that you are tapped into misinformation sites and that's where a lot of your stuff comes from. If they had identified any serious adverse events such as those with the Johnson and Johnson vaccine that had possibly been caused by the vaccines, you would know about it (like you know about what happened with the Johnson and Johnson vaccine).

BTW, here is one independent analysis of VAERS data; https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10 ... 70599/full

Bottom line:



Yes, it is being monitored. Listen, SG, I don't know who the hell you are listening to with all your stuff. But you need to stop listening to them.
FOIA proves they were not performing the safety signal reports on VAERS.
Since CDC officials stated publicly that “COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring is the most robust in U.S. history,” I had assumed that at the very least, CDC officials were monitoring VAERS using the methods they described in a briefing document posted on the CDC website in January 2021 (and updated in February 2022, with minor changes).

I was wrong.

The lynchpin of their safety monitoring was to mine VAERS data for safety signals by calculating what are known as proportional reporting ratios (PRRs).
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defe ... ne-safety/
CDC Admits It Never Monitored VAERS for COVID Vaccine Safety Signals
And here we go again. I say the CDC isn't doing work they were supposed to do and you give me a link to someone OTHER than the CDC. Plus remember, you incorrectly stated VAERS was full of regular people putting information in there.
All you showed there is that i was correct in thinking you are consulting whack job conspiracy theory web sites. You have an article by one guy writing for Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s anti vax site basically saying he did things on his own that disagree with what CDC and FDA say about detection of adverse events. I looked him up and he's a Sociologist, not an epidemiologist. That doesn't mean he absolutely has to be wrong. But you have a guy writing on a quack web site who is a sociologist disagreeing with two agencies that are loaded with epidemiologists and statisticians.

He also makes a big deal about the fact that CDC saying in their letter that they did not do "Proportional Rating Ratio" (PPR). HE says it's the "lynchpin of safety monitoring." But then he shows language from a briefing document saying that PPR is comparing adverse events associated with one vaccine to those associated with another. That is NOT looking at adverse events following a vaccination and seeing if the frequency appears to be different than what you would expect in the general population. And the CDC clearly stated in their letter that they conducted "signal assessment."

With respect to who can put information into VAERS, it is this a quote from the VAERS website at https://vaers.hhs.gov/reportevent.html:
Anyone can submit a report to VAERS, including parents and patients.
Does that mean VAERS is "full of regular people putting information in?" I don't know. But anyone can put data in.
Last edited by JohnStOnge on Fri Aug 26, 2022 4:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by SeattleGriz »

JohnStOnge wrote: Fri Aug 26, 2022 3:20 pm
SeattleGriz wrote: Wed Aug 24, 2022 6:50 pm

FOIA proves they were not performing the safety signal reports on VAERS.



https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defe ... ne-safety/



And here we go again. I say the CDC isn't doing work they were supposed to do and you give me a link to someone OTHER than the CDC. Plus remember, you incorrectly stated VAERS was full of regular people putting information in there.
All you showed there is that i was correct in thinking you are consulting whack job conspiracy theory web sites.
:rofl: The cry of those that have no rebuttal. A FOIA is a FOIA regardless of whether you like a website or not. Nice deflection. How about you be a sport and give us a link to those PRR reports?

You've been hilarious on this thread though. Constantly parroting the changing stance of the CDC and Fauci. 95% effective, dead end for virus, won't go to the hospital, won't die, mRNA leaves your body immediately. Keep it up bro, you just keep losing credibility with every "change in science" and your belief in zero Covid.

Here's a little more info for you.

https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/2022/ ... rse-events
In a June 2022 letter to the CDC, Sen. Johnson outlined the CDC’s Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) document dated January 29, 2021, in which the agency claimed it would “perform routine [Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)] surveillance to identify potential new safety concerns for COVID-19 vaccines.” The SOP also stated that the “CDC will perform Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR) analysis . . . to identify [adverse events]” and “perform PRR data mining on a weekly basis or as needed.”

However, in response to a May 9, 2022 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, the CDC wrote, “no PRRs were conducted.
https://www.ft.com/content/d482491f-ed0 ... 5cd195b082
The director of the top US public health agency has admitted the organisation made some “pretty dramatic, pretty public mistakes” in tackling the Covid-19 pandemic and unveiled a shake-up of personnel and policies designed to improve its response to emergency situations
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by JohnStOnge »

SeattleGriz wrote: Fri Aug 26, 2022 3:39 pm
JohnStOnge wrote: Fri Aug 26, 2022 3:20 pm

All you showed there is that i was correct in thinking you are consulting whack job conspiracy theory web sites.
:rofl: The cry of those that have no rebuttal. A FOIA is a FOIA regardless of whether you like a website or not. Nice deflection. How about you be a sport and give us a link to those PRR reports?

You've been hilarious on this thread though. Constantly parroting the changing stance of the CDC and Fauci. 95% effective, dead end for virus, won't go to the hospital, won't die, mRNA leaves your body immediately. Keep it up bro, you just keep losing credibility with every "change in science" and your belief in zero Covid.

Here's a little more info for you.

https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/2022/ ... rse-events
In a June 2022 letter to the CDC, Sen. Johnson outlined the CDC’s Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) document dated January 29, 2021, in which the agency claimed it would “perform routine [Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)] surveillance to identify potential new safety concerns for COVID-19 vaccines.” The SOP also stated that the “CDC will perform Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR) analysis . . . to identify [adverse events]” and “perform PRR data mining on a weekly basis or as needed.”

However, in response to a May 9, 2022 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, the CDC wrote, “no PRRs were conducted.
https://www.ft.com/content/d482491f-ed0 ... 5cd195b082
The director of the top US public health agency has admitted the organisation made some “pretty dramatic, pretty public mistakes” in tackling the Covid-19 pandemic and unveiled a shake-up of personnel and policies designed to improve its response to emergency situations
i added content. Probably should've done that before the first post. The guy did not show that CDC and FDA are not monitoring for signals. He's an anti vax nut. You are consulting unreliable sources.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by SeattleGriz »

JohnStOnge wrote: Fri Aug 26, 2022 4:07 pm
SeattleGriz wrote: Fri Aug 26, 2022 3:39 pm

:rofl: The cry of those that have no rebuttal. A FOIA is a FOIA regardless of whether you like a website or not. Nice deflection. How about you be a sport and give us a link to those PRR reports?

You've been hilarious on this thread though. Constantly parroting the changing stance of the CDC and Fauci. 95% effective, dead end for virus, won't go to the hospital, won't die, mRNA leaves your body immediately. Keep it up bro, you just keep losing credibility with every "change in science" and your belief in zero Covid.

Here's a little more info for you.

https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/2022/ ... rse-events



https://www.ft.com/content/d482491f-ed0 ... 5cd195b082

i added content. Probably should've done that before the first post. The guy did not show that CDC and FDA are not monitoring for signals. He's an anti vax nut. You are consulting unreliable sources.
Stop deflecting and find us those PRR reports bro. That'll settle this discussion. Nevermind Sent Ron Johnson hasn't gotten a reply when asking for them to be produced.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by JohnStOnge »

SeattleGriz wrote: Fri Aug 26, 2022 3:39 pm You've been hilarious on this thread though. Constantly parroting the changing stance of the CDC and Fauci. 95% effective, dead end for virus, won't go to the hospital, won't die, mRNA leaves your body immediately. Keep it up bro, you just keep losing credibility with every "change in science" and your belief in zero Covid.
[/quote]

Yes, I said that there was 95% efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine and 94.1% efficacy by the Moderna vaccine against the initial variant because that is what the clinical trials clearly showed. But i said none of that other stuff. I said that there is a much lower chance that you will go to the hospital. And that is true. I said that there is a much lower chance that you will die. And that is true. i have never even heard of the question of whether mRNA leaves your body immediately.

My credibility with people who are rational is fine. I think I would worry more about my credibility if I were consulting whack job web sites.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by JohnStOnge »

SeattleGriz wrote: Fri Aug 26, 2022 4:09 pm
JohnStOnge wrote: Fri Aug 26, 2022 4:07 pm

i added content. Probably should've done that before the first post. The guy did not show that CDC and FDA are not monitoring for signals. He's an anti vax nut. You are consulting unreliable sources.
Stop deflecting and find us those PRR reports bro. That'll settle this discussion. Nevermind Sent Ron Johnson hasn't gotten a reply when asking for them to be produced.
No defecting. As I said, if you really read what the guy referenced, the PRR reports are not essential. They do not involve comparing the rate of any particular adverse event among the vaccinated population to the rate expected without vaccination. They are not the "lynchpin" as the guy claims.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 16534
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by SeattleGriz »

JohnStOnge wrote: Fri Aug 26, 2022 4:27 pm
SeattleGriz wrote: Fri Aug 26, 2022 4:09 pm

Stop deflecting and find us those PRR reports bro. That'll settle this discussion. Nevermind Sent Ron Johnson hasn't gotten a reply when asking for them to be produced.
No defecting. As I said, if you really read what the guy referenced, the PRR reports are not essential. They do not involve comparing the rate of any particular adverse event among the vaccinated population to the rate expected without vaccination. They are not the "lynchpin" as the guy claims.
There is absolutely nothing you won't turn yourself inside out over, is there? The CDC put in THEIR standard operating procedure that they were going to use VAERS because it was a robust reporting system to produce PRR reports. None were produced. You don't even understand that a PRR is used as a first step in determining signal detection.

https://www.rxmd.com/proportional-reporting-ratio/
A PRR is an initial step. It implies association. Once association is established, an investigation into causation commences.
The list goes on and on with you. The best is where you criticize someone who isn't an epidemiologist, but you've admitted you've never taken a college level course in either Virology or Immunology and Serology. Puhleaze. But "if only" everyone would have listened to you, we would be free from COVID.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
JohnStOnge
Egalitarian
Egalitarian
Posts: 20313
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:47 pm
I am a fan of: McNeese State
A.K.A.: JohnStOnge

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by JohnStOnge »

SeattleGriz wrote: Fri Aug 26, 2022 4:38 pm
JohnStOnge wrote: Fri Aug 26, 2022 4:27 pm

No defecting. As I said, if you really read what the guy referenced, the PRR reports are not essential. They do not involve comparing the rate of any particular adverse event among the vaccinated population to the rate expected without vaccination. They are not the "lynchpin" as the guy claims.
There is absolutely nothing you won't turn yourself inside out over, is there? The CDC put in THEIR standard operating procedure that they were going to use VAERS because it was a robust reporting system to produce PRR reports. None were produced. You don't even understand that a PRR is used as a first step in determining signal detection.

https://www.rxmd.com/proportional-reporting-ratio/
A PRR is an initial step. It implies association. Once association is established, an investigation into causation commences.
The list goes on and on with you. The best is where you criticize someone who isn't an epidemiologist, but you've admitted you've never taken a college level course in either Virology or Immunology and Serology. Puhleaze. But "if only" everyone would have listened to you, we would be free from COVID.
I have now had the time to look at the materials, click some links in the Children's Health Defense article, etc. The CDC did not admit it never monitored VAERS for for COVID vaccine safety signals.

The first thing to note is that the CDC standard operating procedure (SOP) starts with a disclaimer. It goes like this:
This document is a draft planning document for internal use by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, with collaborating contractors. Numerous aspects (including but not limited to specific adverse events to be monitored, time frames for report processing data elements to be reported, and data analysis) are dynamic and subject to change without notice.
So the fact that they did not use a particular data analysis approach, like caclulating proportional reporting ratios (PPRs), is not a big deal.

The author of the article made a big deal of Rochelle Walensky saying, during April 2021, that they had not established an association between vaccination and myocarditis. But the article quotes another expert saying there were not enough data yet. And the letter from CDC the author presents shows that the CDC had responded by that time to signals of possible myocarditis and assessed that a causal association exists between vaccination and myocarditis.

I do think that the person who wrote the CDC letter should have provided more explanation because he had to have known he was dealing with people who would parse his words and try to make like something nefarious was going on. If he was going to say no PPRs were calculated and that the CDC was not doing data mining he should have pointed out that the SOP could change without notice and explain what was done. But it is clear that signal monitoring was going on and CDC was responding to it.

Which brings us back to the original point that started this particular exchange. Public health agencies in the United States are monitoring for possible adverse events caused by the vaccinations. What they've seen is that serious adverse events associated with the vaccinations are very rare. The vaccines are safe by any reasonable standard of what safe is and the benefits overwhelmingly outweigh the risk. And if you are an individual deciding upon it the risk associated with NOT doing it clearly exceeds the risk associated with doing it.

As for your comments about me not having a college course in virology or immunology or serology: That has nothing to do with this particular discussion. This is about statistics and epidemiology.
Well, I believe that I must tell the truth
And say things as they really are
But if I told the truth and nothing but the truth
Could I ever be a star?

Deep Purple: No One Came
Image
User avatar
SDHornet
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19443
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by SDHornet »

8-)

User avatar
SDHornet
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19443
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets

Re: Coronavirus COVID-19

Post by SDHornet »

Guy called it before it was even cool to do so.

Post Reply