A doctor's recent bout with COVID. It's not what you think.

[lwf]

we know now that vaccinated people are dying at even higher rates than non-vaccinated

aint that something ?

Source?

 

[Good4Nothin]

Prove your statements... I won't let you make statements unless you can back them up with credible sources. Note that I have; I expect you to do the same.

You won't LET ME? Huh?

What I said is perfectly obvious. It is backed up by simple logic. Several things changed at the same time, so you can't assume only one of them caused the decreased death rate.

If the vaccines saved lives, we do not know to what extent. A computer model study ESTIMATED they saved millions of lives. But the model was based on the assumption that the vaccines were highly effective. In other words, a bogus drug industry study.

 

[lwf]

And when the vaccines were being promoted, it WAS claimed they would prevent infection. You don't remember that?

Source?

 

[upsideguy]

You won't LET ME? Huh?

What I said is perfectly obvious. It is backed up by simple logic. Several things changed at the same time, so you can't assume only one of them caused the decreased death rate.

There have been numerous government and academic studies on this that speaks to the effectiveness of the vaccine and its effect on getting ahead of the pandemic. I posted several. Do you need a dozen more?

If the vaccines saved lives, we do not know to what extent. A computer model study ESTIMATED they saved millions of lives. But the model was based on the assumption that the vaccines were highly effective. In other words, a bogus drug industry study.

Again, why don't you look at some of the studies I posted and tell us what they got wrong. Feel free to argue against the AMA, the NEJoM, and studies conducted in Europe, Canada and Australia that were posted above. Or, perhaps you can just continue to post your unsubstantiated opinions, but are flailing to make points that you can't seem to back up. Its obvious to everyone else you have no command of the issues and therefore your opinion is irrelevant to the discussion.

Interesting name, btw.

 

[Fledermaus]

The vaccine makers claimed at the beginning that their research showed the vaccines were 95% effective at preventing covid.

Yes, and?

 

[JasperL]

moral of the story - vaccines and masking and social distancing didn't stop him from getting covid and being older, you can faint when you're sick

Not really..... He pointed out that he didn't wear masks in lots of indoor areas.

 

[JasperL]

we know now that vaccinated people are dying at even higher rates than non-vaccinated

That's bullshit. Sorry to be blunt, but why even try that garbage, and without a link? Do you think we are stupid?

If you're going to make idiotic claims like that, the least you can do is tell us how "we" "know" this nonsense. The only way this is possibly true is if you compare groups of unvaccinated 20 somethings with fully vaxed 80 year olds.

 

[JasperL]

Maybe because ventilators were the wrong treatment.

And the better alternative was what? They were on ventilators because they would die otherwise. So as they were gasping for breath, what should doctors have done?

 

[CaughtInThe]

And the better alternative was what? They were on ventilators because they would die otherwise. So as they were gasping for breath, what should doctors have done?

milk duds?

 

[JasperL]

You won't LET ME? Huh?

What I said is perfectly obvious. It is backed up by simple logic. Several things changed at the same time, so you can't assume only one of them caused the decreased death rate.

Well, gosh, maybe that is why the studies use groups of the vaccinated, and unvaccinated, and match them by age, and other relevant demographic and health characteristics and then compare them over time. Surely you've read them, so you know this, so why pretend they just did a WAG and didn't control for those factors. Of course they did. The researchers are not idiots.

If you want to claim some flaw in the many studies that show the vaccine was effective, pick one, any of them, and then we'll go through it. At this point there are many good ones available.

If the vaccines saved lives, we do not know to what extent. A computer model study ESTIMATED they saved millions of lives. But the model was based on the assumption that the vaccines were highly effective. In other words, a bogus drug industry study.

Those were not "assumptions" The effectiveness data came from studies.

Put another way, if you want to claim vaccines were NOT effective, how can you do it? With studies, using the same data the researchers used to show they were effective. So show your work. What data are YOU relying on here? It's not enough to wave a hand and say, "bogus drug industry study." You need other EVIDENCE that's better than these studies. So link them.

 

[CaughtInThe]

You won't LET ME? Huh?

What I said is perfectly obvious. It is backed up by simple logic. Several things changed at the same time, so you can't assume only one of them caused the decreased death rate.

If the vaccines saved lives, we do not know to what extent. A computer model study ESTIMATED they saved millions of lives. But the model was based on the assumption that the vaccines were highly effective. In other words, a bogus drug industry study.

do you know that you'd gain a huge amount of respect here if you would admit that you were wrong about COVID and the vaccines?

or, you could stay on that crazy train.

 

[snakestretcher]

we know now that vaccinated people are dying at even higher rates than non-vaccinated

aint that something ?

This is a lie. Where did you get that piece of 'information'; Fox-or some idiot right-wing youtuber?

 

[snakestretcher]

since every American IMO has been exposed to covid and since the shots don't keep you from getting covid .... you/your family likely had covid and it was so mild you didn't know it

shotted does NOT mean you won't get covid, you know that, right ?

But it will stop you getting so sick that you end your days gasping for breath on a ventilator. Like this guy:

Fitness enthusiast, 42, who rejected vaccine, dies of Covid

John Eyers had been climbing mountains four weeks before his death in intensive care

www.theguardian.com

 

[snakestretcher]

Maybe because ventilators were the wrong treatment.

Being put on a ventilator because your lungs are so ****ed that you can't breathe, is the "wrong treatment"? What would Dr. Good4Nothin prescribe?

 

[hecatmoggie]

Yes, Biden misspoke about that. ...

aka lied

but anyone that understood vaccines know they can't prevent you from getting sick, they just give you resiliency to ensure you don't get very sick. Note resiliency doesn't even mean that you can not die from it, it means that outcome is far less likely. This statement is almost self evident as you can see CoVid deaths fall dramatically after the rollout of the vaccine.

so vaccines don't stop you from getting a virus like smallpox or polio, measles or rubella?

As to the effectiveness, you are going to have to prove that statement as the data (and common sense --- look we are not losing people by the thousands each day) tell us you are wrong.

some places like Haiti never had high deaths anyway. We're not seeing deaths as high because of natural immunity

 

[hecatmoggie]

But it will stop you getting so sick that you end your days gasping for breath on a ventilator. Like this guy:

Fitness enthusiast, 42, who rejected vaccine, dies of Covid

John Eyers had been climbing mountains four weeks before his death in intensive care

www.theguardian.com

more people shotted are dying than not shotted - so .............. it doesn't stop you from "getting so sick" no

 

[hecatmoggie]

That's bullshit. Sorry to be blunt, but why even try that garbage, and without a link? Do you think we are stupid?

If you're going to make idiotic claims like that, the least you can do is tell us how "we" "know" this nonsense. The only way this is possibly true is if you compare groups of unvaccinated 20 somethings with fully vaxed 80 year olds.

I don't see a 2023 chart fast but you see the trend - maybe its reversed? still, gotta be very troubling for people shotted to see

Why Do Vaccinated People Represent Most COVID-19 Deaths Right Now? | KFF

This post explores why the share of COVID-19 deaths among those who are vaccinated has risen, Factors include a rising share of the population that is vaccinated, waning immune protection and low uptake of boosters, and changes in immunity among the unvaccinated.

www.kff.org

there are many links - the google can provide

 

[Fledermaus]

more people shotted are dying than not shotted - so .............. it doesn't stop you from "getting so sick" no

WHO are the most likely to be "shotted"?

 

[Fledermaus]

I don't see a 2023 chart fast but you see the trend - maybe its reversed? still, gotta be very troubling for people shotted to see

Why Do Vaccinated People Represent Most COVID-19 Deaths Right Now? | KFF

This post explores why the share of COVID-19 deaths among those who are vaccinated has risen, Factors include a rising share of the population that is vaccinated, waning immune protection and low uptake of boosters, and changes in immunity among the unvaccinated.

www.kff.org

there are many links - the google can provide

During the early rollout of vaccines, vaccinated people represented a small share of total deaths, but experts warned that the share would likely rise simply because vaccinated people were representing a growing share of the population. In other words, if 100% of people in the U.S. were vaccinated, vaccinated people would represent 100% of COVID-19 deaths. Similarly, as the share of the population with a booster rose somewhat during 2022, the share of deaths among boosted people also rose. COVID-19 vaccines are very effective at preventing severe illness and death, but they are not perfect, so deaths among vaccinated people will still occur.


Indeed, vaccinated people now make up the majority of the population – 79% of adults have completed at least the primary series – and the latest CDC data show that vaccinated people also now represent the majority of COVID-19 deaths. There are many more vaccinated people than there are unvaccinated people, and vaccinated and boosted people are, on average, older and more likely to have underlying health conditions that put them at risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes. That’s why, when CDC adjusts for some of these factors (age and population size), we still see that unvaccinated people are at much greater risk of death and other severe outcomes than people the same age who have stayed up-to-date on boosters. Older people are at greater risk for severe illness and death from COVID-19 than younger people, but vaccines and boosters still lower that risk substantially.

 

[JasperL]

I don't see a 2023 chart fast but you see the trend - maybe its reversed? still, gotta be very troubling for people shotted to see

Why Do Vaccinated People Represent Most COVID-19 Deaths Right Now? | KFF

This post explores why the share of COVID-19 deaths among those who are vaccinated has risen, Factors include a rising share of the population that is vaccinated, waning immune protection and low uptake of boosters, and changes in immunity among the unvaccinated.

www.kff.org

there are many links - the google can provide

This is what I figured. First of all, you claimed that the vaccinated were dying at higher RATES than the unvaccinated, then you cite raw numbers, not rates, so moved the goal posts. The key point is right there in your link.

During the early rollout of vaccines, vaccinated people represented a small share of total deaths, but experts warned that the share would likely rise simply because vaccinated people were representing a growing share of the population. In other words, if 100% of people in the U.S. were vaccinated, vaccinated people would represent 100% of COVID-19 deaths. Similarly, as the share of the population with a booster rose somewhat during 2022, the share of deaths among boosted people also rose.

So of course you cannot compare raw numbers unless you intend to make a dishonest argument. Something like 80% of all adults completed the primary series. So if the vaccine was just useless - didn't help, at all - if we adjust for age (and health factors) if we looked at raw numbers (not rates) we'd see that about 80% of all adults who die of COVID or complications would be fully vaccinated (ignore boosters here since your data did), and 95% of all 65+ who die would be vaccinated. Not adjusting for anything, the numbers are per your link 60%, 6/10.

So if you look at rates of death among groups matched by JUST age (so this ignores that those of us with risk factors are more likely to be vaccinated than those who deem themselves 'healthy') That graph looks like this:

CDT Redirect Page

In the last year or so, the graph looks like this:


So there isn't a time since this started that being vaccinated didn't lower my chance at dying. And even this limited metric (deaths) ignores serious cases. I'm just as interested in avoiding an ER stay, or long stay in the hospital as I am death, and vaccines reduce those as well.

So, no, the data do not trouble me at all, and I'm sure I'll get a booster at my next appointment with my primary care doctor in a few weeks.

 

[snakestretcher]

aka lied


so vaccines don't stop you from getting a virus like smallpox or polio, measles or rubella?



some places like Haiti never had high deaths anyway. We're not seeing deaths as high because of natural immunity

Nobody is "naturally" immune from Covid-19. Do you understand how immunity works?

 

[Good4Nothin]

Well, gosh, maybe that is why the studies use groups of the vaccinated, and unvaccinated, and match them by age, and other relevant demographic and health characteristics and then compare them over time. Surely you've read them, so you know this, so why pretend they just did a WAG and didn't control for those factors. Of course they did. The researchers are not idiots.

If you want to claim some flaw in the many studies that show the vaccine was effective, pick one, any of them, and then we'll go through it. At this point there are many good ones available.

Those were not "assumptions" The effectiveness data came from studies.

Put another way, if you want to claim vaccines were NOT effective, how can you do it? With studies, using the same data the researchers used to show they were effective. So show your work. What data are YOU relying on here? It's not enough to wave a hand and say, "bogus drug industry study." You need other EVIDENCE that's better than these studies. So link them.

Yet you can't give one link to one of those studies.

 

[JasperL]

Yet you can't give one link to one of those studies.

First of all, you're the one making the claim, so it's your burden to prove YOUR claim. It's not mine to disprove it.

As to links, see #45 above. He made a claim we could test, and I responded to that claim. And people have given you dozens or 100s of links to vaccine effectiveness studies in these threads, and your reaction is 100% predictable. You ignore them or disregard them as the corrupt work of the evil drug industry. You did it in THIS THREAD. This post provides links to several studies. You ignored them all, because of course you did.

At some point feeding that position is a useless exercise.

Just for example, you made this statement: "Your "reasoning" here is not very reasonable. Other things changed besides having the vaccines -- the virus mutated and became less likely to cause severe disease, many people had already been infected and had natural immunity, the extremely vulnerable had already been killed by it. Of course the death rate has decreased. It would have decreased with or without the vaccines, so there is no way to know if or how much the vaccines actually helped."

All that is true, and the CDC data I presented above address all those points. The only way they match populations is by age, but the results do reflect the underlying changes in the lethality of the COVID virus over time, natural immunity over time, and the deaths of the "extremely vulnerable" early on. And the results are clear - vaccines worked to prevent deaths. Early on the difference was dramatic, less so as the virus has become less lethal overall. Look at the data, and recall that the MOST vulnerable were the first to get vaccinated.

And there is a way to know if or how much the vaccines actually helped, within broad parameters. Obviously we cannot go back in time and rerun our lived history, but without vaccines - that would be definitive, if only we had a time machine for the entire world. We don't have that. So, in the alternative, what many researchers have done, such as CDC above, is match the population (above just on age, not health status) and compare death rates, vaccinated versus unvaccinated, booster or not, and compare death rates in the case of the data above.

If you want to dismiss the CDC data above, you'll need more than hand waving. Show YOUR work.

 

[StillBallin75]

moral of the story - vaccines and masking and social distancing didn't stop him from getting covid and being older, you can faint when you're sick

That's not the "moral of the story." The moral of the story is that even the person who is the most aware and adherent to the rules can still get ****ed up, so people who are reckless and think "it's over" are at even greater risk.

 

[Kushinator]

since every American IMO has been exposed to covid and since the shots don't keep you from getting covid .... you/your family likely had covid and it was so mild you didn't know it

shotted does NOT mean you won't get covid, you know that, right ?

Shotted means you are less likely to die from COVID-19... got it?