ADVERTISEMENT

Is COVID a Common Cold Yet?

In multivariable analysis,the bivalent vaccinated state was independently associated with lower risk of COVID-19 (HR, .70; 95%C.I., .61-.80), leading to an estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of 30% (95% CI, 20-39%). Compared to last exposure to SARS-CoV-2 within 90 days, last exposure 6-9 months previously was associated with twice the risk of COVID-19, and last exposure 9-12 months previously with 3.5 times the risk.

Your link is misinterpreting the underlined part here.

COMPARED TO EXPOSURE WITHIN 90 DAYS
, you have 2x the risk of infection at 6-9 months and 3.5x the risk at 9-12 months.

Which means that, just like flu, the vaccines cannot keep up with rapidly changing variants, and the immune system antibody levels drop. BUT the memory cells remain, which means infection severity is still exceedingly likely to be much lower with boosters.
vaccines cannot keep up with rapidly changing variants”

I mean.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinehawk
“The association of increased risk of COVID-19 with higher numbers of prior vaccine doses in our study, was unexpected.”

I’ll bet. :rolleyes:
headlines on news articles about scientific studies are almost always wrong because the headline writers don't really understand what they're reading. We need better science reporters. That's definitely true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joes Place
headlines on news articles about scientific studies are almost always wrong because the headline writers don't really understand what they're reading. We need better science reporters. That's definitely true.
also, don't get your science reporting from "yournews.com". At least try to find a site with real editorial guidelines. Even then, find someone who actually understands the science to explain those. Quite often journalists will make a claim, then bring a scientist on who says, "Well, not really." Science is tough and most journalists do a very poor job of communicating it unfortunately. I don't think it's on purpose, I just think if you're not a scientist, trying to understand what studies really mean is not easy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joes Place
“Given the demonstrated safety (??) of the earlier mRNA vaccines and the perceived urgency of need of a more effective preventive tool, these vaccines were approved without demonstration of effectiveness in clinical studies.”
 
“Given the demonstrated safety (??) of the earlier mRNA vaccines and the perceived urgency of need of a more effective preventive tool, these vaccines were approved without demonstration of effectiveness in clinical studies.”

That's how flu vaccines are pushed out, spud.
Every year. They really have no idea how well those will match. Some years, good; others, not.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pinehawk
Indications are that we're headed that direction...

Per CDC provisional data for 2022, it's looking to be far far away from "the common cold" still


YearAge GroupCOVID-19 DeathsInfluenza DeathsRatio
2022Under 1 year1841810.2
20220-17 years6061304.7
20221-4 years126333.8
20225-14 years183672.7
202215-24 years6136010.2
202218-29 years13278116.4
202225-34 years22549523.7
202230-39 years338614623.2
202235-44 years499020824.0
202240-49 years754223931.6
202245-54 years1186832336.7
202250-64 years37270106934.9
202255-64 years2991386134.7
202265-74 years52000139737.2
202275-84 years65357177036.9
202285 years and over70845190237.2

COVID:
  • 5x more deaths in children, overall than flu
  • 3x more in 5-14 yrs than flu
  • 10x more in adolescents/young adults
  • And the ratios go up from there....

 
Uh....being vaccinated LOWERS your risk of passing the virus on to others.

For a number of reasons that have been outlined for you many many times here.
No it doesn’t in a meaningful way at all. Certainly not certain enough to compel vaccination on that basis.

Love to see a link to ANY study that demonstrates this clearly.
 
Sorry. You’re the one making assertions you can’t back up.
I can back them up. I want to see if you can use Google, to find readily available information.

Or, are you too dumb to do this. There are well over a half dozen refs out there.
 
I can back them up. I want to see if you can use Google, to find readily available information.

Or, are you too dumb to do this. There are well over a half dozen refs out there.
I dont need the references. I just wanted you to prove what you assert. You cannot.

Based on my prior handles experience, I already know there’s only one dumb person in this conversation.

Haven’t seen you in the new board? You headed over there?
 
I dont need the references.
Yeah, I figured you weren't gonna want to read, anyway. That's how MAGAs roll



https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2022/12/4...s-prior-infection-reduce-transmission-omicron






 
I dont need the references. I just wanted you to prove what you assert. You cannot.

Based on my prior handles experience, I already know there’s only one dumb person in this conversation.

Haven’t seen you in the new board? You headed over there?
I would still like to know your prior handle or I'm going to have to assume you're the dumb one. I don't understand why you would be a chicken shit about it. You could tell us vaguely why you won't share it at least.
 
Yeah, I figured you weren't gonna want to read, anyway. That's how MAGAs roll



https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2022/12/4...s-prior-infection-reduce-transmission-omicron







Lots of opinions it seems..
 

Lots of opinions it seems..
That's an Op-Ed, not a journal article/study.

And it includes an EARLY study which states:

"A study2 of covid-19 transmission within English households using data gathered in early 2021 found that even a single dose of a covid-19 vaccine reduced the likelihood of household transmission by 40-50%. "

MOST studies HAVE indicated benefits in reducing transmission SINCE your Op Ed was written.

And, if you want to learn more, then Google HOW they reduce transmission; via things like "shorter incubation periods", "lower viral shedding levels", "antibodies already attached to shed virus", etc etc etc.
 
I would still like to know your prior handle or I'm going to have to assume you're the dumb one. I don't understand why you would be a chicken shit about it. You could tell us vaguely why you won't share it at least.
Because I prefer to have a bit more anonymity this go round. My prior handle and post history gave out enough info that I could be doxxed easy enough.

Bottom line is that I have some local public policy exposure, and a relatively public profession, and in this day and age anyone with any sort of online presence with controversial opinions best protect themselves. Make sense?
 
That's an Op-Ed, not a journal article/study.

And it includes an EARLY study which states:

"A study2 of covid-19 transmission within English households using data gathered in early 2021 found that even a single dose of a covid-19 vaccine reduced the likelihood of household transmission by 40-50%. "

MOST studies HAVE indicated benefits in reducing transmission SINCE your Op Ed was written.

And, if you want to learn more, then Google HOW they reduce transmission; via things like "shorter incubation periods", "lower viral shedding levels", "antibodies already attached to shed virus", etc etc etc.
It is an op Ed but it also addresses the question summarizing prior studies and expert opinion. There are others but it’s late….
 
Because I prefer to have a bit more anonymity this go round. My prior handle and post history gave out enough info that I could be doxxed easy enough.

Bottom line is that I have some local public policy exposure, and a relatively public profession, and in this day and age anyone with any sort of online presence with controversial opinions best protect themselves. Make sense?
It does. Kind of. My opinions wouldn't be the problems with my posts. A lot of other problems, but you must have some pretty wild opinions to worry about this.
 
ADVERTISEMENT