ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 3815 of 3903
« First < 2815331537153765380538113812381338143815 381638173818381938253865 > Last »
Nzoner's Game Room>***NON-POLITICAL COVID-19 Discussion Thread***
JakeF 10:28 PM 02-26-2020
A couple of reminders...

Originally Posted by Bwana:
Once again, don't come in this thread with some kind of political agenda, or you will be shown the door. If you want to go that route, there is a thread about this in DC.
Originally Posted by Dartgod:
People, there is a lot of good information in this thread, let's try to keep the petty bickering to a minimum.

We all have varying opinions about the impact of this, the numbers, etc. We will all never agree with each other. But we can all keep it civil.

Thanks!

Click here for the original OP:

Spoiler!

[Reply]
O.city 09:21 AM 12-08-2021
Originally Posted by Nirvana58:
Yeah this whole take the shot to save Grandma needs to stop. The vaccine does not prevent spread.
It does, but not entirely.
[Reply]
MahomesMagic 09:23 AM 12-08-2021
Originally Posted by O.city:
It does, but not entirely.
It does if we limit the time window and measure. If we just look at real world data and results, no.
[Reply]
loochy 09:25 AM 12-08-2021
Originally Posted by Nirvana58:
Yeah this whole take the shot to save Grandma needs to stop. The vaccine does not prevent spread.

It does, indirectly, although not completely.



It makes one less likely to get the virus in the first place. If one isn't infected then one isn't passing it along.


If one does get the virus, the severity and duration will likely be lessened. That means less virus shedding over a shorter amount of time.
[Reply]
MahomesMagic 09:28 AM 12-08-2021
Originally Posted by loochy:
It does, indirectly, although not completely.



It makes one less likely to get the virus in the first place. If one isn't infected then one isn't passing it along.


If one does get the virus, the severity and duration will likely be lessened. That means less virus shedding over a shorter amount of time.
If that is true how can cases be higher now in areas approaching 90% injected when last year there were no vaccines or few people had it.
[Reply]
DaFace 09:29 AM 12-08-2021
Originally Posted by O.city:
It does, but not entirely.
It's incredibly frustrating that the perception that's it doesn't is still so prevalent. Do a tiny bit of research, people! And your Facebook friends don't count.
[Reply]
DaFace 09:30 AM 12-08-2021
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
If that is true how can cases be higher now in areas approaching 90% injected when last year there were no vaccines or few people had it.
It's almost like there's been a new strain or something.
[Reply]
MahomesMagic 09:32 AM 12-08-2021
Originally Posted by DaFace:
It's almost like there's been a new strain or something.
So you're saying they did work in the past to stop infection but do not now because the virus mutated (as they always do)?
[Reply]
DaFace 09:35 AM 12-08-2021
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
So you're saying they did work in the past to stop infection but do not now because the virus mutated (as they always do)?
Are you capable of understanding that there are numbers between 0% and 100%? You always seem to think everything is black and white, which makes trying to discuss anything with you a waste of time.
[Reply]
MahomesMagic 09:38 AM 12-08-2021
Originally Posted by DaFace:
Are you capable of understanding that there are numbers between 0% and 100%? You always seem to think everything is black and white, which makes trying to discuss anything with you a waste of time.
It's definitely not black and white.

My personal view based on looking at the data is that

1.1st shot immediately after there is NEGATIVE efficacy. You are more likely to get infected

2.After 2nd shot there is a window of some protection

3.That Protection against infection rapidly declines approaching zero or less

The overall effect in a population appears to be zero.
[Reply]
loochy 09:39 AM 12-08-2021
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
So you're saying they did work in the past to stop infection but do not now because the virus mutated (as they always do)?

They worked better through the aforementioned secondary methods early on against less transmissible strains....of course....if you get sick, you'll still be contagious. They never fully stopped infection, obviously.


I feel I should say that I'm totally against forced vax, but I am pro-choice vax. I can't say that I actually think this whole thing would be over if everyone vaxed, but it would be lessened by a large degree. Also, it's ridiculous to think that everyone in every country could be vaccinated, so the thing will continue to rage on there and travelers will continue to bring it back here. This can never end outside of some kind of 100%, one dose vaccine. There are too many holes otherwise.
[Reply]
MahomesMagic 09:41 AM 12-08-2021
Originally Posted by loochy:
They worked better through the aforementioned secondary methods early on against less transmissible strains....of course....if you get sick, you'll still be contagious. They never fully stopped infection, obviously.


I feel I should say that I'm totally against forced vax, but I am pro-choice vax. I can't say that I actually think this whole thing would be over if everyone vaxed, but it would be lessened by a large degree. Also, it's ridiculous to think that everyone in every country could be vaccinated, so the thing will continue to rage on there and travelers will continue to bring it back here. This can never end outside of some kind of 100%, one dose vaccine. There are too many holes otherwise.
I am not here to argue for or against. I just think the only data now supporting the Covid 19 shots are for protection against death and hospitalizations, but even that is not randomized control numbers,.
[Reply]
DaFace 09:41 AM 12-08-2021
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
It's definitely not black and white.

My personal view based on looking at the data is that

1.1st shot immediately after there is NEGATIVE efficacy. You are more likely to get infected

2.After 2nd shot there is a window of some protection

3.That Protection against infection rapidly declines approaching zero or less

The overall effect in a population appears to be zero.
Please cite your sources.
[Reply]
Donger 09:42 AM 12-08-2021

[Reply]
Monticore 09:44 AM 12-08-2021
Originally Posted by DaFace:
It's incredibly frustrating that the perception that's it doesn't is still so prevalent. Do a tiny bit of research, people! And your Facebook friends don't count.
if 1 person has 5% chance of getting it and 10% reduced chance of developing covid and spreading it (made up numbers for example) on an individual basis those don't look to impressive but if everyone around you is similar the protection as a whole can become exponential .
[Reply]
Lzen 09:45 AM 12-08-2021
Originally Posted by DaFace:
It's incredibly frustrating that the perception that's it doesn't is still so prevalent. Do a tiny bit of research, people! And your Facebook friends don't count.
Yeah, those people that spread misinformation suck. I agree. But it's just as annoying when people shun any kind of questioning of the narrative.

This vid is a couple months old so if the data has changed since then I would be open to reviewing it.


[Reply]
Page 3815 of 3903
« First < 2815331537153765380538113812381338143815 381638173818381938253865 > Last »
Up