Oh Look, a dead Proud Boy
- Thread starter Funky Bunch
- Start date
I know you're a college edumacated guy/gal (sorry don't want to assume your gender) but the only way you will experience any side effects of the experiment is to let them jab it into your arm. Unless of course we're dealing with a leaky experiment. Are we dealing with a leaky experiment?
Nope
Placebo effects exist. That is WHY whenever they are testing any drug, they have an untreated placebo group to establish that baseline. It is standard in running these kinds of tests. In fact, if you look at vaccine studies, there was a group that did NOT get any vaccine, they got a saline injection, so that they could identify false placebo-triggered complaints.
I already knew the answer, I wondered if you’d admit it.
You can get up to 58%…for a month, before it weakens further.
I guess our definitions of effective are quite different.
“Booster effectiveness peaked at approximately 4 weeks and waned afterward. For all participants 12 years of age or older, vaccine effectiveness against severe infection resulting in hospitalization over days 15 to 99 after receipt of one monovalent booster dose was 25.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], –0.2 to 44.2), and the corresponding vaccine effectiveness for one bivalent booster dose was 58.7% (95% CI, 43.7 to 69.8);”
Sometimes, you have to rely on more than just what "Google" shows you in their first search hit
Bivalent COVID-19 boosters may cut risk of severe disease by more than half
"When compared with unvaccinated patients, VE of a bivalent booster dose in preventing COVID-19–associated hospitalization was 84%," the authors said. "When compared with patients who had received ≥2 monovalent-only mRNA vaccine doses ≥2 months before illness onset, relative VE of a bivalent booster dose was 73%."
The authors said their findings should reinforce the importance of bivalent boosters for older adults, who are most at risk for severe outcomes of COVID-19 infections. Currently bivalent booster dose coverage in the United States remains low among adults, with only 16% of those aged 18 to 64 boosted, and 36% of those 65 and older.
"All eligible persons, especially adults aged ≥65 years, should receive a bivalent booster dose to maximize protection against COVID-19 hospitalization this winter season," the authors concluded.
Seems like you just THOUGHT you knew the answer....
Omicron COVID booster cuts hospitalization in over 65s, Israeli study finds
The Omicron-adapted COVID-19 vaccine booster developed by Pfizer Inc and BioNTech SE sharply reduced hospitalizations among older patients, Israeli researchers said on Monday, in some of the first evidence of the jab's real-world effectiveness.
www.reuters.com
The study by researchers from healthcare provider Clalit, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev and Sapir College has not yet been peer reviewed.
It found an 81% reduction in hospitalizations among people aged 65 and older who had received the booster against those who had previously received at least two COVID vaccinations, but not the Omicron-adapted shot.
...
"Hospitalization due to Covid-19 occurred in 6 bivalent recipients and 297 participants who did not" receive it, the study said. "Death due to Covid-19 occurred in 1 bivalent recipient and 73 participants who did not."
Cherry picking a small sample of data should be beneath you. Of course it’s more effective for old people. That’s about the only group that really need boosters.
We mandated the vaccine for working age people though. Not retirees.
It’s barely effective for most people, and that effectiveness wears off quickly.
We mandated the vaccine for working age people though. Not retirees.
It’s barely effective for most people, and that effectiveness wears off quickly.
It's OTHER STUDIES.
And the one YOU cited shows a 2.5X benefit, Cletus. I said 3x. Close enough, because the OTHER sources indicate WAY higher than 3x benefit.
Well he/she is an antivaxxer...not understanding math should be a given
If you think they are real, then they are real.... they're still beneficial affects, correct?
Uh....yeah. They actually are real.
Literally why they are a part of any study they can practically be included.
Since @Pinehawk only has an emoji to respond to the 2.5x lower risk claim - I'll lay it out for the math-inhibited.
Group A hospitalizations / Group B hospitalizations = 100 / 40 = 2.5x
The vaccines reduced the risk by 2.5x for the bivalent vaccine for "identical" Group B.
Now, the link I'd posted from Israel indicated 81%-86% effectiveness for the bivalent vaccines.
Same math applied to our hypothetical groups here means instead of 100 hospitalizations, we have 14-19 hospitalizations, based on that study result (100-81 and 100-86).
100 / 14 = 7.1x risk reduction
100 / 19 = 5.3x risk reduction
The original post that @Pinehawk threw a hissy-fit over stated "3x-6x" reduced risk. From these two studies, that actual range is about 2.5x to 7x, which is a little wider range than I'd posted, but close enough.
(FTR: A "50% effective vaccine" will cut your risk in half.)
@Pinehawk doesn't want to admit the vaccines are effective, so he won't learn the math to compute these risk-ratios.
Or, he's just plain dumb.
- Say we have a group of people, 2000, and 5% will end up hospitalized with Covid when infected.
- We magically "clone" this group with another, of identical people with identical immune system and vaccination history. We have identical groups, A and B.
- 5% hospitalization means 100 of them will end up with severe Covid and in the hospital when infected (both groups); BUT, we add in the bivalent vaccine to Group B.
- The vaccine (as Pinehawk posted) is "60% effective" in preventing serious disease/hospitalization.
- So, Group A ends up with 100 hospitalized.
- Group B has "60%" of that 100 who are NOT hospitalized, because the vaccine was "60% effective".
- 60% of 100 is 60, so the vaccine prevents 60 hospitalization in Group B.
- 40 in Group B are hospitalized.
Group A hospitalizations / Group B hospitalizations = 100 / 40 = 2.5x
The vaccines reduced the risk by 2.5x for the bivalent vaccine for "identical" Group B.
Now, the link I'd posted from Israel indicated 81%-86% effectiveness for the bivalent vaccines.
Same math applied to our hypothetical groups here means instead of 100 hospitalizations, we have 14-19 hospitalizations, based on that study result (100-81 and 100-86).
100 / 14 = 7.1x risk reduction
100 / 19 = 5.3x risk reduction
The original post that @Pinehawk threw a hissy-fit over stated "3x-6x" reduced risk. From these two studies, that actual range is about 2.5x to 7x, which is a little wider range than I'd posted, but close enough.
(FTR: A "50% effective vaccine" will cut your risk in half.)
@Pinehawk doesn't want to admit the vaccines are effective, so he won't learn the math to compute these risk-ratios.
Or, he's just plain dumb.
I just kind of chuckle to myself when people who are the poster child of ”My Freedoms” die by their sword. I do feel sorry for their families though for the embarrassing “Funeral for an imbecile” they are obligated to arrange.
YOU CANT MAKE ME WEAR A HELMET - LAND OF THE FREE!
www.theguardian.com
YOU CANT MAKE ME WEAR A SEATBELT - LAND OF THE FREE!
www.snopes.com
MAGAs who don't understand medicine/science - YOU CANT MAKE ME GET A VACCINE - I DID MY RESEARCH!
newsone.com
YOU CANT MAKE ME WEAR A HELMET - LAND OF THE FREE!
Florida attorney who fought helmet laws dies in motorcycle crash
Ron Smith and his girlfriend, Brenda Jeanan Volpe, weren’t wearing helmets in fatal August crash
YOU CANT MAKE ME WEAR A SEATBELT - LAND OF THE FREE!
Was an Anti-Seat Belt Law Advocate Killed in an Automobile Accident?
Anti-seat belt law advocate is killed in automobile accident.
www.snopes.com
MAGAs who don't understand medicine/science - YOU CANT MAKE ME GET A VACCINE - I DID MY RESEARCH!
Notable Anti-Vaxxers Who Died From COVID-19
For a while there, anti-vaxxers with a platform who protested against or tried to discredit the COVID-19 vaccine were dying from the virus.
newsone.com
