Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.

[Kiero]

  Omicron is a bit worse than a bad cold, but I would not put it at Flu level.  I say this after 4 of us got it.  With varying results.  But I also would not say in any way shape or form was it in the same zip code as a possible hospitalization.

It was barely a bad cold when me and mine had it. My kids were ill for a couple of days at most. Me for five.

[oggsmash]

  Omicron is a bit worse than a bad cold, but I would not put it at Flu level.  I say this after 4 of us got it.  With varying results.  But I also would not say in any way shape or form was it in the same zip code as a possible hospitalization.

It was barely a bad cold when me and mine had it. My kids were ill for a couple of days at most. Me for five.

  Never had a cold, even the worst one, that had me sick for 5 days, bad is 2, so I think we were on different scales.  I can agree with that being where we fell though. 

[rgalex]

If anyone's interested:
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm

New study that compares hospitalization rates among those who are vaccinated, who had a previous infection, or who had no protection at all. It's an early release, but by all reports seems to be a pretty solid study, controlling for all relevant factors. What's interesting is that it's by the CDC, and published by them, and ends up strongly supporting natural immunity. Here's the key graph:



That big blue line that makes a big peak then a smaller one across the middle of the graph? Those are the people with no previous exposure. If you haven't been vaccinated or caught covid-19 before, there's a significant risk of hospitalization.

The most interesting part is the lines at the bottom. You see the clump of nearly straight lines just barely above the y-axis? That's everyone else. If you've had the jab or the disease, your chances of hospitalization are really low, almost flatlined. And the natural immunity line is below the vaccinated line, meaning natural immunity works better than the vax. Previous exposure plus vaccination is better, but the two lines are almost on top of each other, so the vax doesn't add much to natural immunity.

I think this the first time the CDC has admitted the efficacy of natural immunity when it comes to covid-19.

I am shocked, simply shocked, at Kiero's lack of response to this.

Am I reading this right?  At the height of that chart an unvaccinated person who had also not already caught COVID had a roughly 1.7% chance of being hospitalized.  That's... not that bad.

Also, looking at that it seems to confirm that natural immunity was better than being vaccinated.  Now, yeah, having had caught COVID and being vaccinated looks like it gave the best chance of not ending up in the hospital.  The thing is that that added "protection" from being vaccinated or having had COVID to having both is such a fractional benefit that it looks nearly insignificant.  It certainly doesn't seem worth all the mandates and other shit that's been pushed.

[consolcwby]

The despair here is palpable! Keep it going! Ban all the mothertruckers and any who doubt the state's 'mah sigh-ance' from life!!!! Muh-hahahahah! Wait until they round-up anyone who makes under 100bil USD for being a 'drag' on their transociety! HAHAHAHAH! Okay, I'll lurk moar again. 

[dkabq]

If anyone's interested:
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm

New study that compares hospitalization rates among those who are vaccinated, who had a previous infection, or who had no protection at all. It's an early release, but by all reports seems to be a pretty solid study, controlling for all relevant factors. What's interesting is that it's by the CDC, and published by them, and ends up strongly supporting natural immunity. Here's the key graph:



That big blue line that makes a big peak then a smaller one across the middle of the graph? Those are the people with no previous exposure. If you haven't been vaccinated or caught covid-19 before, there's a significant risk of hospitalization.

The most interesting part is the lines at the bottom. You see the clump of nearly straight lines just barely above the y-axis? That's everyone else. If you've had the jab or the disease, your chances of hospitalization are really low, almost flatlined. And the natural immunity line is below the vaccinated line, meaning natural immunity works better than the vax. Previous exposure plus vaccination is better, but the two lines are almost on top of each other, so the vax doesn't add much to natural immunity.

I think this the first time the CDC has admitted the efficacy of natural immunity when it comes to covid-19.

I am shocked, simply shocked, at Kiero's lack of response to this.

Am I reading this right?  At the height of that chart an unvaccinated person who had also not already caught COVID had a roughly 1.7% chance of being hospitalized.  That's... not that bad.

Also, looking at that it seems to confirm that natural immunity was better than being vaccinated.  Now, yeah, having had caught COVID and being vaccinated looks like it gave the best chance of not ending up in the hospital.  The thing is that that added "protection" from being vaccinated or having had COVID to having both is such a fractional benefit that it looks nearly insignificant.  It certainly doesn't seem worth all the mandates and other shit that's been pushed.

I do not believe that is correct. From the figure on the CDC website:
Estimated hazard rate is laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations per 100,000 person-days visualized at midpoint of each reporting interval.

At the peak, in CA, for unvaxxed, no previous covid, the hospitalization rate was 18/(100,000 person-days). So on that peak day, for every 100,000 persons in CA, 18 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations occurred.

[oggsmash]

WTF is estimated hazard rate?   How about just telling us how many people had covid, and how many had to go to the hospital (though that could get interesting, as many people can just take a home test, and never be entered into the data as to who had covid AND Omicron has a very small window to test positive on a PRC test).  So you could get a spike in hospitalizations compared to actual cases.   I think these people are just making shit up at this point.

[Zelen]

Arguing about statistics at this stage seems quite pointless. They've been lying about everything since 2019 and onward. They didn't suddenly become truthful. Lying liars are untrustworthy, and it is pointless to engage in their deceitful word game shenanigans. ("Oh ho! A pregnant woman giving birth counts as 'unvaxed' hospitalization for C-19!")

STFU. They're evil liars.

[Pat]

WTF is estimated hazard rate?   How about just telling us how many people had covid, and how many had to go to the hospital (though that could get interesting, as many people can just take a home test, and never be entered into the data as to who had covid AND Omicron has a very small window to test positive on a PRC test).  So you could get a spike in hospitalizations compared to actual cases.   I think these people are just making shit up at this point.

Because that's not what the study is measuring, and it would require a different set of data.

Here's Vinay Prasad discussing the merits of the study and its conclusions. It's the first time the CDC admits the strength of natural immunity, and the study itself does an excellent job combining the data from two states and separating out separate cohorts, like those who had natural immunity, those who had immunity from the different vaccines, those who had both, and those who had neither. Prasad is seriously overqualified to make this assessment, being a statistics geek who is also an M.D. with a Masters of Public Health, and who has published more than 300 scientific papers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CPTj1-RS5o

[Kiero]

  Never had a cold, even the worst one, that had me sick for 5 days, bad is 2, so I think we were on different scales.  I can agree with that being where we fell though.

I was ill enough to stop exercising for that period of time. Otherwise I carried on doing everything as normal.

Normal colds give me the sniffles for 48 hours, but I don't stop exercising for them.

[dkabq]

WTF is estimated hazard rate?   How about just telling us how many people had covid, and how many had to go to the hospital (though that could get interesting, as many people can just take a home test, and never be entered into the data as to who had covid AND Omicron has a very small window to test positive on a PRC test).  So you could get a spike in hospitalizations compared to actual cases.   I think these people are just making shit up at this point.

Because that's not what the study is measuring, and it would require a different set of data.

Here's Vinay Prasad discussing the merits of the study and its conclusions. It's the first time the CDC admits the strength of natural immunity, and the study itself does an excellent job combining the data from two states and separating out separate cohorts, like those who had natural immunity, those who had immunity from the different vaccines, those who had both, and those who had neither. Prasad is seriously overqualified to make this assessment, being a statistics geek who is also an M.D. with a Masters of Public Health, and who has published more than 300 scientific papers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CPTj1-RS5o

My take-away is that, like small pox, measles, etc., if you have had the disease you do not need to take the vaccine. But counter to that, the government has decided that everyone should get the covid vaccine. To add insult to injury, let's not forget that it has been known since late summer 2021 (before Mr. "I will never mandate taking the covid vaccine" issued his mandate dicta) that the vaccine does not stop you from transmitting the virus or catching the virus. I guess it is because SCIENCE!(tm).

[Kiero]

My take-away is that, like small pox, measles, etc., if you have had the disease you do not need to take the vaccine. But counter to that, the government has decided that everyone should get the covid vaccine. To add insult to injury, let's not forget that it has been known since late summer 2021 (before Mr. "I will never mandate taking the covid vaccine" issued his mandate dicta) that the vaccine does not stop you from transmitting the virus or catching the virus. I guess it is because SCIENCE!(tm).

It's simpler than that, the jabs are not vaccines.

[Pat]

WTF is estimated hazard rate?   How about just telling us how many people had covid, and how many had to go to the hospital (though that could get interesting, as many people can just take a home test, and never be entered into the data as to who had covid AND Omicron has a very small window to test positive on a PRC test).  So you could get a spike in hospitalizations compared to actual cases.   I think these people are just making shit up at this point.

Because that's not what the study is measuring, and it would require a different set of data.

Here's Vinay Prasad discussing the merits of the study and its conclusions. It's the first time the CDC admits the strength of natural immunity, and the study itself does an excellent job combining the data from two states and separating out separate cohorts, like those who had natural immunity, those who had immunity from the different vaccines, those who had both, and those who had neither. Prasad is seriously overqualified to make this assessment, being a statistics geek who is also an M.D. with a Masters of Public Health, and who has published more than 300 scientific papers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CPTj1-RS5o

My take-away is that, like small pox, measles, etc., if you have had the disease you do not need to take the vaccine. But counter to that, the government has decided that everyone should get the covid vaccine. To add insult to injury, let's not forget that it has been known since late summer 2021 (before Mr. "I will never mandate taking the covid vaccine" issued his mandate dicta) that the vaccine does not stop you from transmitting the virus or catching the virus. I guess it is because SCIENCE!(tm).

That's the only reasonable take-away, even before the paper. And don't forget that the baseline risk is very low for the vast majority of the population, and the vaccines have known negative side effects and unknown long-term effects. Pushing for universal vaccination is cult-like behavior, not science.

[Pat]

My take-away is that, like small pox, measles, etc., if you have had the disease you do not need to take the vaccine. But counter to that, the government has decided that everyone should get the covid vaccine. To add insult to injury, let's not forget that it has been known since late summer 2021 (before Mr. "I will never mandate taking the covid vaccine" issued his mandate dicta) that the vaccine does not stop you from transmitting the virus or catching the virus. I guess it is because SCIENCE!(tm).

It's simpler than that, the jabs are not vaccines.

That's always been a stupid argument. They're very leaky vaccines, but they're vaccines.

[oggsmash]

My take-away is that, like small pox, measles, etc., if you have had the disease you do not need to take the vaccine. But counter to that, the government has decided that everyone should get the covid vaccine. To add insult to injury, let's not forget that it has been known since late summer 2021 (before Mr. "I will never mandate taking the covid vaccine" issued his mandate dicta) that the vaccine does not stop you from transmitting the virus or catching the virus. I guess it is because SCIENCE!(tm).

It's simpler than that, the jabs are not vaccines.

That's always been a stupid argument. They're very leaky vaccines, but they're vaccines.

  well....only by the loosest of definitions and most certainly not to the modern expectation of a vaccination.  They are often for a strain that was the last, or 2-3 strains ago, they do basically nothing at this point to prevent infection from the current strain, they also at this point do about jack shit to lessen the symptoms as well.  So though I would have agreed that is a stupid argument a year ago, that "learning new information" you mention means current day, it is a pretty sensible argument.

[Kiero]

That's always been a stupid argument. They're very leaky vaccines, but they're vaccines.

No they are not, they fail the long-standing definition of a vaccine, which is to provide immunity to infection.

There's only one other "vaccine" that fails that test: the flu jab. Which at least has the virtue of being relatively harmless, even while being useless.