Yeah, so you attack a poster after failing to understand what he wrote, and then can’t take being called out for your nonsense. And you spew a lot of nonsense. Take a break from the board to sort out your anger issues, and take a reading course while you’re at it, sport.
OT: COVID Science - Pfizer/Moderna vaccines >90% effective; Regeneron antibody cocktail looks very promising in phase II/III trial and more
- Thread starter RU848789
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, so you attack a poster after failing to understand what he wrote, and then can’t take being called out for your nonsense. And you spew a lot of nonsense. Take a break from the board to sort out your anger issues, and take a reading course while you’re at it, sport.
I think he and the CDC are wrong on an average of 3300/day to get to 200K by the end of January, but he's merely quoting the CDC - it's a plausible high end of the estimate. I've been saying 2000-2500/day (with peaks up to 3000/day likely) until the end of January and I've been closer to the actual numbers than the CDC or IHME for months now.
Except he didn’t say by the end of December. Try again.
Out of curiosity, had you considered the volume of Thanksgiving travel in your estimates?
Interesting stuff.Here are some interesting scientific views that you are not hearing in main stream media really. It makes for a interesting read.
Helpful links to help you fight the COVIDiots!
Thought that I'd put together some helpful links for your Thanksgiving holiday.nj1015.com
No, I was just considering the general increase in indoor contacts, but yeah, the TG/XMAS travel and gathering activities could certainly bump the numbers up, which is why I said they might peak at 3000 deaths/day. I still think 3300/day is too high, even with bumps up, but I could be wrong.
he said this
I don't want to scare anybody here but understand the facts: we're likely to lose another 250,000 people, dead, between now and January,
what does BETWEEN mean
in the time, space, or interval that separates
Thanks. I suppose the bottom line is your lower estimates would result in nearly 140,000 deaths. That’s a terrible, and was an avoidable, tragedy. And behavior through Thanksgiving and other holidays doesn’t lend confidence that Christmas will be any different. A very dark winter, indeed.
He said what the head of the CDC said. The number of cases, hospitalizations and risky behavior to see those number of deaths materialize isn’t far fetched, and as I wrote to numbers above, even if the figures come in lower, you’re still talking about a tremendous number of unnecessary fatalities Whether it’s 150,000 or 250,000 deaths by the end of January. Biden is correct to call it out and encourage people to act responsibly.
Now, are you going to take back your false comment about the cause of the higher number of cases?
to put things into perspective, on average we lose 200,000 people every month even without covid.
Higher number of cases? Haven't heard. I thought wearing masks and closing restaurants was the cure. Oh wait El Paso said the largest infection rate was from Wal-Mart big box stores yet they stay open.
yeah whats 100K extra deaths...nah nothing wrong with gaslighting there
and again he said between now and January
what needs to explained and I know some here are not interested in deep dives is to find out who is dying and survival rate for most ages
so in Minnesota...67% of their deaths are in LTC and across the midwest we still have about half the deaths recently coming in LTR....there has been ample time to figure out how to protect the eldery in LTC...instead we have the msm and posters here using death numbers with no context and not focusing on where half the deaths are currently coming from...yes data and context matters
so in Minnesota...67% of their deaths are in LTC and across the midwest we still have about half the deaths recently coming in LTR....there has been ample time to figure out how to protect the eldery in LTC...instead we have the msm and posters here using death numbers with no context and not focusing on where half the deaths are currently coming from...yes data and context matters
Well, you’ve been misinformed. First, the number of cases has skyrocketed. Second, no one credible said that mask wearing as a “cure.” They said it was the most effective way, along with social distancing, to slow the spread. Not eliminate the spread.
That is not context or perspective. It is a completely irrelevant statistic.
Last edited:
An extra 100k deaths would make a horrible, unnecessary tragedy a far worse tragedy.
He repeated what was said by the government officials most informed about the pandemic. Let’s hope he continues to do so.
How so? Biden’s quote was “don’t be afraid but we are going to lose 250000” Americans in a month” (or something to that..don’t have exact quote)
why would that make Americans afraid? That’s about an average amount of people we lose a month even without covid. It’s all fear mongering
actually im pretty sure that you were on record earlier saying that MASKS WERE MOST IMPORTANT
Last edited:
Do you have trouble grasping concepts that aren't spelled out for you down to the smallest detail?
Seems so.
Well, discussions of masks, deaths, and virus origins always lead to churn in these threads, so let's try to get back to some less controversial COVID science. Today, Derek Lowe posted an interesting article speculating about what might happen if people decided to get two different vaccines, which I assume can happen. He discussed how this has happened for past vaccines for things like polio, Hepatitis-A and B, and meningococcus, where the two vaccines taken were usually very similar to each other and in most cases, there were no issues.
However, he noted that for COVID we're going to likely soon have 2 mRNA vaccines (Moderna/Pfizer), 2 adenovirus vector vaccines (J&J/Astra-Zeneca) and a protein-based vaccine (Novavax), so mixing types of vaccines, while probably not an issue, is certainly something we have no data on and won't for some times. Perhaps the people who do this will be kind enough to register that they've done it, so data can be gathered.
https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/12/02/taking-two-different-vaccines
He didn't get into this too much, but folks in the comments section did and it's been discussed here also, and that's the topic of whether previous infection/recovery (with likely immunity) will be an issue. The UK CDC equivalent has said that there shouldn't be an issue with previously infected people getting the vaccine. In a perfect world, I think we'd do an immunology screen of people who say they've recovered and if they show good levels of antibodies (and T-cells, since we seem to be getting those tests ready for prime time), then perhaps we'd ask them to hold off and let someone who hasn't been exposed get the vaccine.
Problem is I don't think we're going to have that kind of testing infrastructure, so it's quite likely that quite a few vaccines will be "wasted" on people who are very, very likely to already be immune, since the CDC now estimates that close to 30% of the population have likely been infected (many of those asymptomatic who should still be immune). Interesting questions...
https://www.npr.org/sections/corona...vid-19-cases-could-be-approaching-100-million
However, he noted that for COVID we're going to likely soon have 2 mRNA vaccines (Moderna/Pfizer), 2 adenovirus vector vaccines (J&J/Astra-Zeneca) and a protein-based vaccine (Novavax), so mixing types of vaccines, while probably not an issue, is certainly something we have no data on and won't for some times. Perhaps the people who do this will be kind enough to register that they've done it, so data can be gathered.
https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/12/02/taking-two-different-vaccines
He didn't get into this too much, but folks in the comments section did and it's been discussed here also, and that's the topic of whether previous infection/recovery (with likely immunity) will be an issue. The UK CDC equivalent has said that there shouldn't be an issue with previously infected people getting the vaccine. In a perfect world, I think we'd do an immunology screen of people who say they've recovered and if they show good levels of antibodies (and T-cells, since we seem to be getting those tests ready for prime time), then perhaps we'd ask them to hold off and let someone who hasn't been exposed get the vaccine.
Problem is I don't think we're going to have that kind of testing infrastructure, so it's quite likely that quite a few vaccines will be "wasted" on people who are very, very likely to already be immune, since the CDC now estimates that close to 30% of the population have likely been infected (many of those asymptomatic who should still be immune). Interesting questions...
https://www.npr.org/sections/corona...vid-19-cases-could-be-approaching-100-million
No one? All you see is ads to wear a masks. Yet social distancing takes a back seat education wise. The most effective way is social distancing even you just got wrong! It's social distancing #1 and masks a far #2.
You were correct that there is no cure for the spread. From day 1 I've said we will all have to face the music.
NoI’m not and did not start the attack conversation. I stated exactly the truth from the post. And trust me I read and understand correctly what was written. It is people such as you who when questioned immediately attempt to badger, belittle and question their education , reading comprehension and the mental capacities with the other poster. I will make this very clear . In my insignificant life I have somehow managed to acquire not only monetary wealth but a great education from the so called erudite educated ones. One thing is certain , at my advancing age , I do not hold back an opinion. I honestly don’t give to shats what you or anyone else thinks or believes to be true. Most like you are great when it’s on a board typing away. Quite the opposite in real upfront and personal face to face ... person to person. True in business, politics and especially on here.
Totally irrelevant to the topic.. The topic isn’t me.
Let me try again. Why should people be afraid of covid that’s gonna cause 200000 to die in a month. When we’ve never been afraid of things cause 200000 deaths a month in the past?
here is what Frida posted from some link a couple months back...its CLEARLY not the most effective, its always been SOCIAL DISTANCING
As does the National Academy of Sciences
Our analysis reveals that the difference with and without mandated face covering represents the determinant in shaping the pandemic trends in the three epicenters. This protective measure alone significantly reduced the number of infections, that is, by over 78,000 in Italy from April 6 to May 9 and over 66,000 in New York City from April 17 to May 9. Other mitigation measures, such as social distancing implemented in the United States, are insufficient by themselves in protecting the public. We conclude that wearing of face masks in public corresponds to the most effective means to prevent interhuman transmission, and this inexpensive practice, in conjunction with simultaneous social distancing, quarantine, and contact tracing, represents the most likely fighting opportunity to stop the COVID-19 pandemic. Our work also highlights the fact that sound science is essential in decision-making for the current and future public health pandemics.
As does the National Academy of Sciences
Our analysis reveals that the difference with and without mandated face covering represents the determinant in shaping the pandemic trends in the three epicenters. This protective measure alone significantly reduced the number of infections, that is, by over 78,000 in Italy from April 6 to May 9 and over 66,000 in New York City from April 17 to May 9. Other mitigation measures, such as social distancing implemented in the United States, are insufficient by themselves in protecting the public. We conclude that wearing of face masks in public corresponds to the most effective means to prevent interhuman transmission, and this inexpensive practice, in conjunction with simultaneous social distancing, quarantine, and contact tracing, represents the most likely fighting opportunity to stop the COVID-19 pandemic. Our work also highlights the fact that sound science is essential in decision-making for the current and future public health pandemics.
Calling attention to losing two times the number of people we typically lose in a month is not fear mongering. It’s a leader informing the public about the potential severe cost of failure to adhere to public health measures. These cases and deaths were preventable. COVID is highly contagious. the causes of death for most of the 200,00 per month you quote (and I’m assuming you’re right about that figure) are generally not cause by a contagious disease. Cancer is not contagious. Car accidents are not contagious. Heart disease is not contagious. This isn’t hard.
Is that a serious question? Comparing an average of all things that cause death vs a single thing that is highly contagious and threatens to double that average on its own?
Not scared, but it's certainly concerning, and not merely due to deaths.
Also, do you not try to avoid things that cause cancer, heart disease, stroke, etc. ?
We lose about 7500 or so on a normal day....and yes there are people dying with covid not FROM IT
Yawn. You’re boring, unintelligent, arrogant and apparently illiterate with sketchy memory. Take a break, and learn to read English.
yes. Just as I do everything to avoid covid. I mask. I social distance. I sanitize hands ridiculously too much. But I live my life and I’m not a sheep to the government.
Don’t be afraid of this thing. All I’m saying. They want us to be afraid
Thank you for posting the abstract from the National Academy of Sciences. They based their findings on research and statistics. In essence, social distancing alone is not nearly as effective as social distancing plus mask wearing. if you have published research refuting their findings, feel free to post.
I’ve never been afraid of cancer/driving/heart disease and the other factors that cause 200k deaths a month. I’m not gonna be afraid of covid that will supposedly cause 200k deaths a month.
im not saying it’s not devestating. Death sucks. It’s devestating. But such is life. We are all gonna die.
Is there any other single cause that leads to 200,000 deaths in a 2 month period?
You are comparing the sum total of deaths attributable to a broad number of mostly non-contagious causes to a similar number of deaths caused by a single, contagious cause. Yes, your context is irrelevant.
Didn't see this posted yet, so here's some more good news, as the UK MHRA (their equivalent of our FDA) approved an emergency use authorization for the Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA vaccine with distribution to begin next week. Almost everyone expects the FDA to do the same for both the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines next week.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-authorises-pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-authorises-pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine
I think my question to you got lost in the middle of this number of COVID deaths (as if 100k more deaths is acceptable instead of another 200k). My question is if you contract the virus after being vaccinated, do you have to take the second vaccine dose?
- Status
