news Covid19-Coronavirus updates and news

[Mister Funsky]

Having relatives and friends scattered all over the globe, I am getting an overload of input (some on the record and some off the record).

My intention for this thread is for community members from around the world to post first hand stories and/or links to information sources that, for the most part, should be reliable.

In my community, just outside a major southeastern city, 'assets' have been placed. Only because I have friends in both high and low places have I heard about some of this. At this point it is only some basic medical supplies that should be equally distributed anyway in preparation for a natural emergency (hurricane/wildfire/etc.).

I will start with posting a link to a site with current data that seems to come from an aggregate of sources and hope others will do the same as they come across similar sites/pages.

Because of the 'typhoid Mary' spread-ability of this disease, I feel we may be in for a really large spread globally which will impact the global economy and through extension, retail domain prices.

One thing is for sure...things will get worse before they get better.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa-coronavirus/

 

[Cannuck]

do you have Proof … because we are past any .. “Lets Say” … every person that is vaccinated can get every variant of Covid at this time = That is a Fact

A new study from Imperial College London suggests that unvaccinated people are three times more likely to test positive for COVID-19 than those who are fully vaccinated.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2108891

 

[Cal2]

there in lies the problem … there are no numbers that I can find to post … and why is that ?? It’s not complicated ..

I'll see if I can turn something up.

Well, here's one source not to listen to when it comes to covid vaccine side effect data #s - anti vaxxers:

How a once-obscure government database turned into a weapon for anti-vaxxers

https://www.niemanlab.org/2021/08/h...tabase-turned-into-a-weapon-for-anti-vaxxers/

CDC & FDA data doesn't support false claims thousands have died from COVID-19 vaccines

https://www.firstcoastnews.com/arti...cines/77-a51f6208-afc2-4045-bdc1-021aec83e77c

 

[Cal2]

I say the same to you … show me your reliable facts … we know that vaccinated are getting covid of all variants .. we know that if vaccinated are getting covid of all variants .. they are spreading covid of all variants and can cause covid mutation because of it … you have no argument of rebuttal that the vaccinated aren’t spreading and causing covid mutation just as much as the unvaccinated

As I expected - no proof, just made-up claims.

Like I said, since you started it with your claims, you 1st with your reliable facts.

 

[.X.]

As I expected - no proof, just made-up claims.

Like I said, since you started it with your claims, you 1st with your reliable facts.

I can’t show stats .. because their are none to show ??? Everything is an opinion .. in this case .. opinions don’t matter IMO

There are no documented statistics of this ..

 

[.X.]

Well, here's one source not to listen to when it comes to covid vaccine side effect data #s - anti vaxxers:

How a once-obscure government database turned into a weapon for anti-vaxxers

https://www.niemanlab.org/2021/08/h...tabase-turned-into-a-weapon-for-anti-vaxxers/

CDC & FDA data doesn't support false claims thousands have died from COVID-19 vaccines

https://www.firstcoastnews.com/arti...cines/77-a51f6208-afc2-4045-bdc1-021aec83e77c

that’s my point .. who knows how many died ?? I can’t say how many .. there are no statistics that are transparent to be found .. which is not a good thing IMO

 

[.X.]

A new study from Imperial College London suggests that unvaccinated people are three times more likely to test positive for COVID-19 than those who are fully vaccinated.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2108891

k …. Not a really reputable source … but ok ..

 

[bmugford]

k …. Not a really reputable source … but ok ..

New England Journal of Medicine is not a reputable source? LOL

They are one of the most respected peer-reviewed medical journals in the world and have been around for 200+ years.

Brad

 

[Cannuck]

k …. Not a really reputable source … but ok ..

Published in the New England Journal of Medicine; 19 authors, 30 medical references, 58 scholarly cross-references...not reputable enough? LOL

 

[.X.]

New England Journal of Medicine is not a reputable source? LOL

They are one of the most respected peer-reviewed medical journals in the world and have been around for 200+ years.

Brad

the Study was done by the empirical college of London and posted by the NJM … anyone else have any studies done on this ??

 

[bmugford]

the Study was done by the empirical college of London and posted by the NJM … anyone else have any studies done on this ??

It is peer-reviewed. The bar is extremely high.
They don't just post random studies.

This is a prestigious medical journal. This is not like some person posting a link to a YouTube video with wild claims.

Cannuck just posted some of the group involved.

Brad

 

[.X.]

The college of NamePros university can submit a study and it’s findings to the New England Journal of Medicine …. Does that make the study trust worthy ???

 

[.X.]

It is peer-reviewed. The bar is extremely high.
They don't just post random studies.

This is a prestigious medical journal. This is not like some person posting a link to a YouTube video with wild claims.

Cannuck just posted some of the group involved.

Brad

ok … then we’re are the statistics of the study … numbers and percentages .. would totally make sense to add them to the submitted study to the NJM .. ya think ???

 

[bmugford]

The college of NamePros university can submit a study and it’s findings to the New England Journal of Medicine …. Does that make the study trust worthy ???

You really have no idea what you are talking about.

Do you understand what a peer-reviewed medical journal is? In peer-reviewed medical journals nonsense studies don't make it into publication.

All the references you seek are linked in the study.

Brad

 

[bmugford]

Here is a start -

• Jamie Lopez Bernal, F.F.P.H., Ph.D.,
• Nick Andrews, Ph.D.,
• Charlotte Gower, D.Phil.,
• Eileen Gallagher, Ph.D.,
• Ruth Simmons, Ph.D.,
• Simon Thelwall, Ph.D.,
• Julia Stowe, Ph.D.,
• Elise Tessier, M.Sc.,
• Natalie Groves, M.Sc.,
• Gavin Dabrera, M.B., B.S., F.F.P.H.,
• Richard Myers, Ph.D.,
• Colin N.J. Campbell, M.P.H., F.F.P.H.,
• Gayatri Amirthalingam, M.F.P.H.,
• Matt Edmunds, M.Sc.,
• Maria Zambon, Ph.D., F.R.C.Path.,
• Kevin E. Brown, M.R.C.P., F.R.C.Path.,
• Susan Hopkins, F.R.C.P., F.F.P.H.,
• Meera Chand, M.R.C.P., F.R.C.Path.,
• and Mary Ramsay, M.B., B.S., F.F.P.H.

 

[.X.]

There are no numbers or percentages .. because it’s 1000% bullshit … otherwise the numbers and percentages would be in the study to back it up

 

[.X.]

You really have no idea what you are talking about.

Do you understand what a peer-reviewed medical journal is?

All the references you seek are linked in the study.

Brad

I know there are no numbers and percentages attached to the report .. surely with all of those doctors .. they did document numbers and come up with a percentage of 3 times more likely … right ?? Where are they ??

 

[bmugford]

I know there are no numbers and percentages attached to the report .. surely with all of those doctors .. they did document numbers and come up with a percentage of 3 times more likely … right ?? Where are they ??

I see the numbers there. I think you need to look a bit harder.
They are listed on Table 2. Both raw totals and percentages.

Brad

 

[.X.]

Here is a start -

• Jamie Lopez Bernal, F.F.P.H., Ph.D.,
• Nick Andrews, Ph.D.,
• Charlotte Gower, D.Phil.,
• Eileen Gallagher, Ph.D.,
• Ruth Simmons, Ph.D.,
• Simon Thelwall, Ph.D.,
• Julia Stowe, Ph.D.,
• Elise Tessier, M.Sc.,
• Natalie Groves, M.Sc.,
• Gavin Dabrera, M.B., B.S., F.F.P.H.,
• Richard Myers, Ph.D.,
• Colin N.J. Campbell, M.P.H., F.F.P.H.,
• Gayatri Amirthalingam, M.F.P.H.,
• Matt Edmunds, M.Sc.,
• Maria Zambon, Ph.D., F.R.C.Path.,
• Kevin E. Brown, M.R.C.P., F.R.C.Path.,
• Susan Hopkins, F.R.C.P., F.F.P.H.,
• Meera Chand, M.R.C.P., F.R.C.Path.,
• and Mary Ramsay, M.B., B.S., F.F.P.H.

so I should instantly believe those “Names” above ??? All I want is the numbers and percentages they documented during their studies that had them come to the conclusion that unvaccinated are 3x more likely to contract as opposed to vaccinated .. I am not trying to pull teeth here .. where are the documented numbers and percentages to back up their findings ..

 

[rh2000]

.. because it’s 1000% bullshit …

Sums it up perfectly.

 

[bmugford]

Sums it up perfectly.

Yeah, I agree. Dunning-Krugers who have no clue what they are talking about thinking they know better than actual experts in a field.

Brad

 

[.X.]

I see the numbers there. I think you need to look a bit harder.
They are listed on Table 2. Both raw totals and percentages.

Brad

they are showing the effectiveness of the vaccine dose 1 and 2 … not how many unvaccinated people got the Delta variant vs how many vaccinated people got the Delta variant … simple numbers to document … simple counting

 

[rh2000]

they are showing the effectiveness of the vaccine dose 1 and 2 … not how many unvaccinated people got the Delta variant vs how many vaccinated people got the Delta variant … simple numbers to document … simple counting

Hoax. The new variant is called Mu.

 

[.X.]

Sums it up perfectly.

Yes … 1000% bullshit .. and these people in here can’t prove otherwise as you see

 

[rh2000]

Yeah, I agree. Dunning-Krugers who have no clue what they are talking about thinking they know better than actual experts in a field.

Brad

I hope hope you still are not wearing 3 masks.

 

[bmugford]

they are showing the effectiveness of the vaccine dose 1 and 2 … not how many unvaccinated people got the Delta variant vs how many vaccinated people got the Delta variant … simple numbers to document … simple counting

What are you asking for exactly? You have a peer-reviewed study that shows the unvaccinated vs 1 dose vs fully vaccinated with raw totals and percentages. I am not sure what else you need.

If your eyes work you can clearly see the more vaccinated you are, the less the spread is in that group.

Delta is 0.042 vs 0.029 vs 0.014 (any vaccine). That is exactly 3x like the study said.

Brad