C*19 Death Rate WAY Lower Than Media Claimed

[JUSA]

Under 18 looks like about 1500 deaths. Relatively speaking that's low, but it's not zero...and the vaccines do significantly decrease your relative probability of serious illness or death.

I still don't have the exact #s, so you might be right but I made a point to separate newborns from 1-18, they made up basically as many deaths as the entirety of 1-18 on their own. Like the elderly, they are immuno-compromised and very vulnerable to covid and everything else.

I look at it like using spotter bars in your home gym for bench. That's one of the only ways to die working out alone, but if you use the safeties it's avoided. Just in the covid case it's a bit worse going for young people. It's what it is, 1500 or so. That's not earth shattering but it's not great and can be avoided for the most part it seems.

I get your analogy but don't agree.

Benching is inherently very dangerous.
Spotting has no dangers or cost associated with it.
Spotting is generally effective (well, maybe not actually)

I prefer my earlier analogy of wearing the heavy metal helmet to ward off meteors. In the case of children with covid, it's more accurate.

[HairyWBush]

That must have been a really tough time for you, son.

Don't neg me again you fukin wuss democrat. People would probably respect you more if you just came out and admitted to your devotions you refuse to reveal.

[z4v4]

Don't neg me again you fukin wuss democrat. People would probably respect you more if you just came out and admitted to your devotions you refuse to reveal.

It was a negback, and your neg comment was much more colorful, son, like the LGBTQV+ flag you fly in front of your house:

"Don't you EVER ****ing neg me again. You're the lowest form of a human just short of a full blown demon. You're not but a fascist/communist sympathizer, a satanic sympathizer, a ****philia sympathizer, and you don't belong in my country."

Brah, owns a country now, LMAO.

[nutsy54]

Enlighten us boot-licker why a child should get the jab.

Enlighten us why you always hide behind personal insults, then try to change the subject whenever an anti-vaccine claim is disproven...

[Dave22reborn]

Enlighten us why you always hide behind personal insults, then try to change the subject whenever an anti-vaccine claim is disproven...

Come on, why should a child get the jab? Wnd did you hear? More vaccine mandates are being dropped throughout the country even in places like Seattle. You must be so upset.

[Dave22reborn]

Under 18 looks like about 1500 deaths. Relatively speaking that's low, but it's not zero...and the vaccines do significantly decrease your relative probability of serious illness or death.

I look at it like using spotter bars in your home gym for bench. That's one of the only ways to die working out alone, but if you use the safeties it's avoided. Just in the covid case it's a bit worse going for young people. It's what it is, 1500 or so. That's not earth shattering but it's not great and can be avoided for the most part it seems.

You're comparing safety bars to the vaccine???

How about this for a home bench, you use a weight that you can handle and control if you're going to be benching by yourself?

[TitsAlternative]

Come on, why should a child get the jab? Wnd did you hear? More vaccine mandates are being dropped throughout the country even in places like Seattle. You must be so upset.

Reduced risk of severe illness and death.

At this point, there are several evasive strains making the utility of the current vaccines not worth mandating. It doesn't mean vaccination is a bad idea, nor does it mean it wasn't the best move earlier.

[Dave22reborn]

Reduced risk of severe illness and death.

At this point, there are several evasive strains making the utility of the current vaccines not worth mandating. It doesn't mean vaccination is a bad idea, nor does it mean it wasn't the best move earlier.

There is no reason for a child nowadays to get the jab, and you know it.

And why should we take advice from someone who has a weak immune system? You never leave the residence and a simple cold would probably leave you bed ridden.

[katya422]

I mean it is the #5 disease related cause of death in kids in the US.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2800816

Low risk does not equal no risk, and you need to understand the baseline and compare appropriately.

I don't know why you feel the need to keep beating this drum.

Or why I keep pushing back either.

The fatality rate for age 1 to 1 age 12 was tracked in the UK where they have a government run health care system so all of their records are centralized. They found that the fatality rate in that age group was 1 or 2 in a million.

So what? Why does that matter? Ignorant is you thinking "healthy" people (which your ignorant fuk brain thinks means physically fit, and before you strawman this, allow me to be explicit: Some physically fit people are healthy. Some are not.) cannot die from covid. In fact, they can and have. This is a respiratory virus. Whether you beat it or not is a matter of whether your immune system produces the right binding antibodies before you die. It's a numbers game. It is not a trial of strength or machismo or a sign of masculinity, you uneducated troglodyte.

The shots were worthless. It was a rushed crap product that should never have been approved. That doesn't mean that all vaccines are worthless, but these shots were not vaccines.

They didn't even slow down the number of covid related deaths.



Link:
https://twitter.com/picphysicians/st...Pi4Tf14kltqsAQ

K you're entitled to your retarded opinion. Pediatricians and epidemiologists who actually went to medical school and give a chit about protecting children take a different view. I can't convince you that number of kids who died matters, nor can I convince you anyone who died to covid matters. At the end of the day, to you, they are acceptable losses. The rest of polite society does not see it that way.

False.

Professionals who accept whatever they are told by the authorities or pharma pushed the shots. And that wasn't in every country. Some countries that were on board with the shots for adults were very hesitant to give them to children.

Even in the documentation that was submitted to get an EUA for childhood vaccination they showed that the shots would put more children in the hospital with heart damage than it would save from death caused by covid.

I linked the video here w/pics of the documentation and it was from a doctor who had supported giving the shots to adults...Dr. Been IIRC.

A study in Thailand found sub-clinical myocarditis in 1 out of 29 boys under 18 post injections when they did a study.

He armed Ukraine. He allowed the US to continue raping Syria for oil. He destroyed the Iran nuclear deal, jeopardizing the region. He nearly overthrew our government, and he provided cover for bigots to shift the Overton window. Antivaxxers have eroded the public trust in the practice of medicine and vaccination, both of which eventually lead to unnecessary and preventable deaths in people.

People will rejoice over any number of things. It doesn't matter. Rejoice all you want.

No, that was the lying liars who did that.

It was pointed out pretty early on that the shots which are supposed to activate an antibody response in the blood won't do crap for a respiratory virus.

Guess who has publicly agreed with this now?



Link:
https://www.cell.com/cell-host-micro...128(22)00572-8

They knew these injections wouldn't do anything to control the spread of the virus and still wanted to mandate it for the entire world. Or at least every breathing soul with the ability to pay.

It has all been one big lie.



Link:
https://parlvu.parl.gc.ca/Harmony/en...30206/-1/38477

We are up to 1 million excess deaths in the last year around the world by some estimates and it isn't from/with covid.



Humans with degrees and credentials are still just humans. They can be corrupt and self-serving. They can be noble and caring. And they can be lied to and fooled.

[J.L.C.]

A challenge trial would likely be required to evaluate the impacts of a vaccine on transmission.

Given the ethical barriers to challenge trials, that is very rarely, if ever, part of vaccine approval.

[katya422]

A challenge trial would likely be required to evaluate the impacts of a vaccine on transmission.

Given the ethical barriers to challenge trials, that is very rarely, if ever, part of vaccine approval.

"Viruses that replicate in mucosal passages cannot be effectively controlled by vaccines that create systemic immunity."

They were aware that these shots wouldn't "stop the spread" and yet still attempted to force them into every arm.

Just like they made up "6 feet apart" and knew that masks wouldn't prevent transmission. Just like they forced small businesses to close, but allowed large businesses to stay open. Just like they wanted to force people to get the shots to enter a restaurant, wanted people to wear a mask inside the restaurant, but then it was okay to take it off to eat.



It was mainly a mass propaganda mind control exercise as far as I cant tell.

Also conveniently allowed them to print a crap load of money while throttling the real economy.

[TheJimmyRustler]

Wow. Says a damn lot about how they good they are.

[J.L.C.]

"Viruses that replicate in mucosal passages cannot be effectively controlled by vaccines that create systemic immunity."

They were aware that these shots wouldn't "stop the spread" and yet still attempted to force them into every arm.

Just like they made up "6 feet apart" and knew that masks wouldn't prevent transmission. Just like they forced small businesses to close, but allowed large businesses to stay open. Just like they wanted to force people to get the shots to enter a restaurant, wanted people to wear a mask inside the restaurant, but then it was okay to take it off to eat.


It was mainly a mass propaganda mind control exercise as far as I cant tell.

Also conveniently allowed them to print a crap load of money while throttling the real economy.

Transmission reduction wasn't an endpoint in the trials for the covid vaccines. Transmission reduction is rarely, if ever, an endpoint in a vaccine trial.

Reducing the chances of infection (Pfizer targeted a vaccine efficacy of 30% or greater) and of severe disease can be important and meaningful mitigation during a pandemic.

Masks do reduce transmission.

[JUSA]

Reduced risk of severe illness and death.

At this point, there are several evasive strains making the utility of the current vaccines not worth mandating. It doesn't mean vaccination is a bad idea, nor does it mean it wasn't the best move earlier.

I was a little harsh with you yesterday, but I think we're on to something here.

You are drawing the line at these new strains, ones which are reportedly weaker and less dangerous to everyone, which includes children. Okay. What's the difference, then? I don't know the current rates, but the old ones we've talked about (0.6 to 1.8 per 100K depending on the age range, with younger children being more resilient).

Shouldn't your reasoning hold up? Pulling #s from the air, if the newer range is 0.4 to 1.2 per 100K - why not continue to get vaccinated and boosted? Both numbers are statistically insignificant to me either way, one just even more than the other.

You mention evasiveness, but the current boosters work more or less as well as the original vaccines did against the original strains, no?

Obviously, I want more testing done - which is a major problem for vaccines, as the virus adapts so quickly that rigorous testing is impossible. I will say though, from my interactions with JLC I do think my position is shifting somewhat. He's hitting some pretty good information showing the non-death but undesirable sides associated with getting covid and I think some data in there showing the vaccines reduce those chances, so more benefit from them beyond simply keeping one alive.

While I do want longer testing, as I just pointed out, that's impossible. I'm starting to be more comfortable with people really at risk getting vaccinated and boosted, even with the potential unknown dangerous variables associated with them. I've never been a "MAGENTS! ALL WILL DIE IN 6 MONTHS" anti-vaccine guy, I've just thought there are potential dangerous and known rare very bad sides and the disease itself was a non-threat to a lot of people.

However, I am thinking now people who are truly at risk shouldn't be faulted for getting vaccinated and will derive some benefit from it. I'll even say, they should get it.

However, 0.6 to 1.8 per 100K, with those falling in that almost 100% assuredly have to be sickly children? Nah. No real benefit and the untested nature of the vaccines w/ children weigh heavier than the very limited benefit all but the very sickest/weakest would derive. Maybe some poor 300lb diabetic child but an average healthy normal kid? Not even close.

You said my opinion was retarded, but let's break it down. Of that 0.6 to 1.8 per 100K, how many of them do you truly think are normal and healthy? Let's be generous, let's say it's 1 out of 20. It's not, but I'm being generous. Okay, so now for healthy children -- the odds are 0.00003% for the best group... meaning what? 3 out of ten million? And that's being generous. Even looking at the slightly more 'at risk' age group of older teens -- 0.00009%?

So, what? maybe 10 or 15 kids a year? Yeah, that sucks, every avoidable death is awful, but 10-15 healthy kids dying in a year? More are shot and killed every single day. And that is being really generous and suggesting one out of 20 children who are dying are healthy and not just the few who are obese and sickly to begin with. Which it's them, pretty much exclusively.

You can not compare that to 9/11, bro. You can not call me retarded for not thinking that is a major or significant danger/threat. You're being paranoid and emotional about it, stop and slow down, use your logic and really think about this for a second.

Oh and on me being harsh, I was, I was having a weird bad day, doesn't happen often and I get grumpy and aggressive. Sorry about that, let's try and keep this civil though, I think both of us can benefit a lot from this if we keep it up.

[Anachron]

You, an appeal to authority? Really. Almost a declaration of defeat coming from you.

Also, while you rather rudely assessed my thoughts as 'retarded', you didn't show it. If it was such a bad take, how did you fail so miserably to show that?

You yourself brought up the numbers. How significant is 0.6 out of 100,000? Couldn't you have shown how it is? Then the shot about pediatricians and implying I think what I do because somehow I dislike children? You who admit you hate humanity, really?

Here is your AAP, American Academy of Pediatrics, who have said to get your kids the vaccine: https://www.influencewatch.org/non-p...of-pediatrics/

No thanks, at least they got re-opening schools better than most.

Oh and here are pediatricians, who know more than you and I, saying NOT to get healthy children vaccinated.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...lthy-children/

Sure, but there is a world of difference between someone 50 and a healthy 12 year old - or as WIncel suggested an Olympic athlete in perfect health.

And this is what in chess we would call a checkmate.

[Audioslave]

I didn't see the video or go through the thread but true fatality rates don't seem to come through until much later. I remember when SARS hit 2 decades ago and it was treated as a joke and we were only told it had maybe a 2% fatality rate. That ended up being way off with it being closer to 15%. I believe for elderly people (over 64) it was like 50%. Fortunately that didn't spread as easily as COVID-19. But thank god it didn't because we vastly underestimated how fatal it was. The "live" fatality rates never seem to really be accurate. It's only until it's well in hindsight that the actual numbers come through.

[TitsAlternative]

I was a little harsh with you yesterday, but I think we're on to something here.

You are drawing the line at these new strains, ones which are reportedly weaker and less dangerous to everyone, which includes children. Okay. What's the difference, then? I don't know the current rates, but the old ones we've talked about (0.6 to 1.8 per 100K depending on the age range, with younger children being more resilient).

Shouldn't your reasoning hold up? Pulling #s from the air, if the newer range is 0.4 to 1.2 per 100K - why not continue to get vaccinated and boosted? Both numbers are statistically insignificant to me either way, one just even more than the other.

You mention evasiveness, but the current boosters work more or less as well as the original vaccines did against the original strains, no?

Obviously, I want more testing done - which is a major problem for vaccines, as the virus adapts so quickly that rigorous testing is impossible. I will say though, from my interactions with JLC I do think my position is shifting somewhat. He's hitting some pretty good information showing the non-death but undesirable sides associated with getting covid and I think some data in there showing the vaccines reduce those chances, so more benefit from them beyond simply keeping one alive.

While I do want longer testing, as I just pointed out, that's impossible. I'm starting to be more comfortable with people really at risk getting vaccinated and boosted, even with the potential unknown dangerous variables associated with them. I've never been a "MAGENTS! ALL WILL DIE IN 6 MONTHS" anti-vaccine guy, I've just thought there are potential dangerous and known rare very bad sides and the disease itself was a non-threat to a lot of people.

However, I am thinking now people who are truly at risk shouldn't be faulted for getting vaccinated and will derive some benefit from it. I'll even say, they should get it.

However, 0.6 to 1.8 per 100K, with those falling in that almost 100% assuredly have to be sickly children? Nah. No real benefit and the untested nature of the vaccines w/ children weigh heavier than the very limited benefit all but the very sickest/weakest would derive. Maybe some poor 300lb diabetic child but an average healthy normal kid? Not even close.

You said my opinion was retarded, but let's break it down. Of that 0.6 to 1.8 per 100K, how many of them do you truly think are normal and healthy? Let's be generous, let's say it's 1 out of 20. It's not, but I'm being generous. Okay, so now for healthy children -- the odds are 0.00003% for the best group... meaning what? 3 out of ten million? And that's being generous. Even looking at the slightly more 'at risk' age group of older teens -- 0.00009%?

So, what? maybe 10 or 15 kids a year? Yeah, that sucks, every avoidable death is awful, but 10-15 healthy kids dying in a year? More are shot and killed every single day. And that is being really generous and suggesting one out of 20 children who are dying are healthy and not just the few who are obese and sickly to begin with. Which it's them, pretty much exclusively.

You can not compare that to 9/11, bro. You can not call me retarded for not thinking that is a major or significant danger/threat. You're being paranoid and emotional about it, stop and slow down, use your logic and really think about this for a second.

Oh and on me being harsh, I was, I was having a weird bad day, doesn't happen often and I get grumpy and aggressive. Sorry about that, let's try and keep this civil though, I think both of us can benefit a lot from this if we keep it up.

It's still a good idea to vaccinate because it is the best tool we have against the virus. Unless the empirical data shows the vaccines are more harmful than the virus is, there is no reason not to vaccinate. I am saying mandates are being relaxed because newer strains are highly evasive.

I told you child deaths are rare in general. But that doesn't mean covid isn't the top infectious disease killer of children in America. It absolutely is. Covid was a major cause of death in this country. And we had tools to help deal with it. I'll also add that deaths do not capture the whole healthcare burden of this disease. If we can help save kids from having lung scarring, heart issues, memory problems, etc, then it is worth using the technology available to us.

I do not agree that those deaths are "insignificant". Again, the #1 killer of children by infectious disease is not "insignificant". You wouldn't call it insignificant if it were your child. And while healthy people dying from covid is rare, it does happen. Also, unhealthy people are not somehow unworthy of life and protection. People are part of this society and deserve to be protected as members of that society. We should use any and all tools available to us to help reduce the burdens of these diseases. Yes, encourage people to exercise and eat properly, stop doing drugs, etc. But that isn't enough to protect you from a respiratory disease. You can still die. We should do what we can to reduce the burden.

Covid has indirectly or directly killed over 13 million people worldwide. Compare that to 9/11. This was a horrible virus. Nobody is "tougher" for downplaying it or ignoring sound medical advice.

[TitsAlternative]

I don't know why you feel the need to keep beating this drum.

Or why I keep pushing back either.

The fatality rate for age 1 to 1 age 12 was tracked in the UK where they have a government run health care system so all of their records are centralized. They found that the fatality rate in that age group was 1 or 2 in a million.




The shots were worthless. It was a rushed crap product that should never have been approved. That doesn't mean that all vaccines are worthless, but these shots were not vaccines.

They didn't even slow down the number of covid related deaths.



Link:
https://twitter.com/picphysicians/st...Pi4Tf14kltqsAQ




False.

Professionals who accept whatever they are told by the authorities or pharma pushed the shots. And that wasn't in every country. Some countries that were on board with the shots for adults were very hesitant to give them to children.

Even in the documentation that was submitted to get an EUA for childhood vaccination they showed that the shots would put more children in the hospital with heart damage than it would save from death caused by covid.

I linked the video here w/pics of the documentation and it was from a doctor who had supported giving the shots to adults...Dr. Been IIRC.

A study in Thailand found sub-clinical myocarditis in 1 out of 29 boys under 18 post injections when they did a study.




No, that was the lying liars who did that.

It was pointed out pretty early on that the shots which are supposed to activate an antibody response in the blood won't do crap for a respiratory virus.

Guess who has publicly agreed with this now?



Link:
https://www.cell.com/cell-host-micro...128(22)00572-8

They knew these injections wouldn't do anything to control the spread of the virus and still wanted to mandate it for the entire world. Or at least every breathing soul with the ability to pay.

It has all been one big lie.



Link:
https://parlvu.parl.gc.ca/Harmony/en...30206/-1/38477

We are up to 1 million excess deaths in the last year around the world by some estimates and it isn't from/with covid.



Humans with degrees and credentials are still just humans. They can be corrupt and self-serving. They can be noble and caring. And they can be lied to and fooled.

I'm going to put as little effort into this as possible.

1) Confounding. UK has entirely different demographics. I am talking about the US. I showed you a study showing the deaths and that this is the #1 infectious disease killer of kids here. We can and should treat it.

2) They are vaccines. They did reduce deaths. I've given you plenty of resources to educate yourself, but you'd rather listen to twitter or substack lay people.
3) So sick of these garbage sources. I can make a bullchit graph too.
4)The lying liars huh? No those were official policy decisions.
5) Did you read the paper? The point is these things mutate rapidly. It doesn't mean we stop vaccinating or that it was a bad idea.
6) Yeah and you seem to think vaccines caused this, in spite of tons of evidence to the contrary from multiple clinical trials and billions of shots given.
7) Yes. But you know who is even more easily fooled? Moms with zero education in science.

[TitsAlternative]

And this is what in chess we would call a checkmate.

Go publish your findings about how all the people who died to covid weren't "significant" and were unhealthy and deserved to die anyway. They surely weren't worth the hassle of giving you a shot or asking you to wear a mask. Let's see what the medical community thinks of this hot, totally novel and profound take.

[JUSA]

It's still a good idea to vaccinate because it is the best tool we have against the virus. Unless the empirical data shows the vaccines are more harmful than the virus is, there is no reason not to vaccinate. I am saying mandates are being relaxed because newer strains are highly evasive.

I told you child deaths are rare in general. But that doesn't mean covid isn't the top infectious disease killer of children in America. It absolutely is. Covid was a major cause of death in this country. And we had tools to help deal with it. I'll also add that deaths do not capture the whole healthcare burden of this disease. If we can help save kids from having lung scarring, heart issues, memory problems, etc, then it is worth using the technology available to us.

I do not agree that those deaths are "insignificant". Again, the #1 killer of children by infectious disease is not "insignificant". You wouldn't call it insignificant if it were your child. And while healthy people dying from covid is rare, it does happen. Also, unhealthy people are not somehow unworthy of life and protection. People are part of this society and deserve to be protected as members of that society. We should use any and all tools available to us to help reduce the burdens of these diseases. Yes, encourage people to exercise and eat properly, stop doing drugs, etc. But that isn't enough to protect you from a respiratory disease. You can still die. We should do what we can to reduce the burden.

Covid has indirectly or directly killed over 13 million people worldwide. Compare that to 9/11. This was a horrible virus. Nobody is "tougher" for downplaying it or ignoring sound medical advice.

Interesting -- two thoughts here: 1) we're not actually *that* far apart but 2) we've reached an impasse, I am glad I see your point and think I have an idea of how you came to your conclusions, but I also think we just view things differently and are both entrenched in those views.

So, real quick:
1. I do not know the vaccines are more harmful than covid itself for any group. If it is for a group: it would be children, though. They are the most resilient of everyone when it comes to the virus and the known *rare* side effects, it concerns me they do outweigh the potential benefits the vaccine offers. Again, I'm not going to compare the Vaccine Vs Covid itself, that's unfair. The vaccines do not ensure you can not get the disease, they lessen it only. So, in theory, some child can get vaccinated, get covid and then die or suffer somehow -- which includes both covid and the potential to suffer from the rare side effects of the vaccine itself.

2. >> "If we can help save kids from having lung scarring, heart issues, memory problems, etc", interesting take and something to consider. I can't recall the specifics, but I do believe JLC had some information showing being vaccinated was a benefit in reducing or avoiding side effects of covid. Of everything, I think this is where I am personally least entrenched, I don't think it's available now but I would be interested in seeing the #s of children who suffer long-term from covid and really would like a breakdown on their health biomarkers. Meaning, pulling #s out of the air, but say 30 out of 100K kids have heart inflammation or lung scarring, it would mean a LOT more to me to know who those 30 kids are. If 29.8 of them are obese and they have multiple comorbitiies, that has a lot different ramifications if the breakdown is more random and it's not just unhealthy children.

3. >> "I do not agree that those deaths are "insignificant"", part of my thinking, is knowing this disease and *who* is at risk. That limits it's significance. It's not that some poor child who has awful health and is morbidly obese is worthless, one of my daughter's brightest and most amazing friends suffers from obesity, but from where I sit, it tells me where the problem is -- and where it is not. It's not like, 'hey fuk those kids' but just that if it's those kids, we know it's those kids - then it's not these other kids. Were I a parent of a sick or obese child, sure -- vaccination to help their odds becomes a conversation and something to entertain.

Anyway, I'll say to get the last word in, not that I'm pissy and retreating, quite the opposite, I've enjoyed this conversation and learned along the way, but I also think it's pointless for two people who aren't going to change to keep at it. I know how you think, you know how I think, there is a lot of overlap and room there for common ground but also places where we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

[TitsAlternative]

Interesting -- two thoughts here: 1) we're not actually *that* far apart but 2) we've reached an impasse, I am glad I see your point and think I have an idea of how you came to your conclusions, but I also think we just view things differently and are both entrenched in those views.

So, real quick:
1. I do not know the vaccines are more harmful than covid itself for any group. If it is for a group: it would be children, though. They are the most resilient of everyone when it comes to the virus and the known *rare* side effects, it concerns me they do outweigh the potential benefits the vaccine offers. Again, I'm not going to compare the Vaccine Vs Covid itself, that's unfair. The vaccines do not ensure you can not get the disease, they lessen it only. So, in theory, some child can get vaccinated, get covid and then die or suffer somehow -- which includes both covid and the potential to suffer from the rare side effects of the vaccine itself.

2. >> "If we can help save kids from having lung scarring, heart issues, memory problems, etc", interesting take and something to consider. I can't recall the specifics, but I do believe JLC had some information showing being vaccinated was a benefit in reducing or avoiding side effects of covid. Of everything, I think this is where I am personally least entrenched, I don't think it's available now but I would be interested in seeing the #s of children who suffer long-term from covid and really would like a breakdown on their health biomarkers. Meaning, pulling #s out of the air, but say 30 out of 100K kids have heart inflammation or lung scarring, it would mean a LOT more to me to know who those 30 kids are. If 29.8 of them are obese and they have multiple comorbitiies, that has a lot different ramifications if the breakdown is more random and it's not just unhealthy children.

3. >> "I do not agree that those deaths are "insignificant"", part of my thinking, is knowing this disease and *who* is at risk. That limits it's significance. It's not that some poor child who has awful health and is morbidly obese is worthless, one of my daughter's brightest and most amazing friends suffers from obesity, but from where I sit, it tells me where the problem is -- and where it is not. It's not like, 'hey fuk those kids' but just that if it's those kids, we know it's those kids - then it's not these other kids. Were I a parent of a sick or obese child, sure -- vaccination to help their odds becomes a conversation and something to entertain.

Anyway, I'll say to get the last word in, not that I'm pissy and retreating, quite the opposite, I've enjoyed this conversation and learned along the way, but I also think it's pointless for two people who aren't going to change to keep at it. I know how you think, you know how I think, there is a lot of overlap and room there for common ground but also places where we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

1) The point is that if vaccinated and then infected with covid, your risk of severe illness or death is far lower than with covid alone. This is because the vaccine actually does do something and buys your immune system time by priming it for similar antigens.

2) That's the entire point of medicine. We want to reduce the burden of disease and use the tools available to achieve that.
3) That was the idea behind "focused protection". The thing is, as I said, even healthy people die too, albeit rarely. It isn't just the fat people. And if we are talking about "preexisting conditions", a huge number of people have them. There is no practical way to "focus" the protection. That's why the overwhelming majority of the medical community laughed at the Great Barrington Declaration. And as far as vaccines, they were lowering risk across the board. So why focus it?

I mean I get that tons of people disagree. I just wish they saw that this isn't some evil scheme. The goal really was to try to save lives. Is Pfizer milking this and scummy? Absolutely. We should void their patents and share their tech with the world. But I do think the vaccines were helpful.

I'm more disappointed by the attitude in general from people. There was just near total indifference to the deaths. People just didn't care at all. Even some celebrities and prominent people died, and no one really cared. They were asked to take a shot and wear a mask, and it was too much. God help us when our adversaries release bioweapons on us for real.

[Jayarbie]

Odd, Mike has been following this very closely and this study is 'new' but it's just saying things I've known and talked about for over a year now.

C*19 is basically only dangerous to certain groups: Elderly or sickly.

There's your cliffs.

I've been saying this for some time now and nobody here who wasn't retard (ie. nobody but Pat) seemed to even question it at all, regardless of where they stood on all this. Earnest posters like JLC even posted links from the CDC saying exactly this as well.

Anyway, here's a new study saying this. I guess if the point is the media inflated, exaggerated and propagandized this, yes they did, but for the rest of us here, most of us knew better already. Video must be aimed at less informed people, most of us know so much more than average people, since we go back and forth over this as much as we do.

I didn't read through the whole thread, but you always tend to focus strictly on death too much. The original virus was lethal almost exclusively to the old and sickly, but it caused a lot of very severe disease for all types of people at the start. The lockdowns in 3/20 were to prevent hospital overruns and to spare healthcare resources, not just strictly to prevent deaths. I know many younger, healthy people, including kids, that ended up hospitalized (my daughter's friend was a 14 year old competitive gymnast and was hospitalized for 2 weeks at the very start of it).

The virus is different now, though, and has been since the omicron mutation. I was for the vaccine when it first came out (although against mandates), but now there is no reason to encourage vaccination for anyone who is not at-risk (i.e. sick or elderly). If you want to get it completely voluntarily, go ahead, though, whatever, nothing wrong with that. The CT autists have also, of course, completely exaggerated the risks as well.

The vaccine really did its job by targeting the original virus and accelerating the mutation process to the omicron version that more or less ended the dangerous pandemic and changed this into an endemic virus like a cold or flu.

[TitsAlternative]

I didn't read through the whole thread, but you always tend to focus strictly on death too much. The original virus was lethal almost exclusively to the old and sickly, but it caused a lot of very severe disease for all types of people at the start. The lockdowns in 3/20 were to prevent hospital overruns and to spare healthcare resources, not just strictly to prevent deaths. I know many younger, healthy people, including kids, that ended up hospitalized (my daughter's friend was a 14 year old competitive gymnast and was hospitalized for 2 weeks at the very start of it).

The virus is different now, though, and has been since the omicron mutation. I was for the vaccine when it first came out (although against mandates), but now there is no reason to encourage vaccination for anyone who is not at-risk (i.e. sick or elderly). If you want to get it completely voluntarily, go ahead, though, whatever, nothing wrong with that. The CT autists have also, of course, completely exaggerated the risks as well.

The vaccine really did its job by targeting the original virus and accelerating the mutation process to the omicron version that more or less ended the dangerous pandemic and changed this into an endemic virus like a cold or flu.

Yeah at this point, it shouldn't be mandated. It should be offered like the flu vaccine. It should still be encouraged, but I don't see the utility in forcing people because they will just double down and it can hurt other vaccination rates. Like a lot of people are now rejecting the tetanus or measles vaccine for kids because of fears of vaccination in general brought on as a response to covid vaccine mandates. That's a whole new can of worms, and those are far more essential to mandate.

[JUSA]

I didn't read through the whole thread, but you always tend to focus strictly on death too much. The original virus was lethal almost exclusively to the old and sickly, but it caused a lot of very severe disease for all types of people at the start. The lockdowns in 3/20 were to prevent hospital overruns and to spare healthcare resources, not just strictly to prevent deaths. I know many younger, healthy people, including kids, that ended up hospitalized (my daughter's friend was a 14 year old competitive gymnast and was hospitalized for 2 weeks at the very start of it).

The virus is different now, though, and has been since the omicron mutation. I was for the vaccine when it first came out (although against mandates), but now there is no reason to encourage vaccination for anyone who is not at-risk (i.e. sick or elderly). If you want to get it completely voluntarily, go ahead, though, whatever, nothing wrong with that. The CT autists have also, of course, completely exaggerated the risks as well.

The vaccine really did its job by targeting the original virus and accelerating the mutation process to the omicron version that more or less ended the dangerous pandemic and changed this into an endemic virus like a cold or flu.

Fyi, I don't know if it was this thread or some other about this stuff -- we saw some data on the many long side effects from covid (thanks JLC)

They did not break it down by age or health, so it's hard to say for sure... Buuut, they did break it down by those who did not go to the hospital, those who went to the ICU and those who went to the hospital but weren't so bad they ended up in the ICU.

To no real surprise, the group blasted the hardest was the ICU group, the hospital-only generally halved and then the non-hospital groups very small.

Which, it might be a couple leaps too many to make, but I took from this that the ones having the most problems with lingering health issues was for the most part the same groups dying (elderly, sickly). You'd expect healthier people would not end up in either the hospital or the ICU and that group made up a very small part of the overall numbers.

As threads here go, this one isn't too bad. Only a couple of unnecessary jabs and a pretty decent exchange of ideas.

[Anachron]

Go publish your findings about how all the people who died to covid weren't "significant" and were unhealthy and deserved to die anyway. They surely weren't worth the hassle of giving you a shot or asking you to wear a mask. Let's see what the medical community thinks of this hot, totally novel and profound take.

Interesting strawman - but not unexpected coming from a pseudointellectual who just parrots MSM talking points.

I see you are confusing "vaccine" and "experimental gene therapy" as well.

You might want to educate yourself on the subject at hand before you comment.

[Anachron]

I didn't read through the whole thread, but you always tend to focus strictly on death too much. The original virus was lethal almost exclusively to the old and sickly, but it caused a lot of very severe disease for all types of people at the start. The lockdowns in 3/20 were to prevent hospital overruns and to spare healthcare resources, not just strictly to prevent deaths. I know many younger, healthy people, including kids, that ended up hospitalized (my daughter's friend was a 14 year old competitive gymnast and was hospitalized for 2 weeks at the very start of it).

The virus is different now, though, and has been since the omicron mutation. I was for the vaccine when it first came out (although against mandates), but now there is no reason to encourage vaccination for anyone who is not at-risk (i.e. sick or elderly). If you want to get it completely voluntarily, go ahead, though, whatever, nothing wrong with that. The CT autists have also, of course, completely exaggerated the risks as well.

The vaccine really did its job by targeting the original virus and accelerating the mutation process to the omicron version that more or less ended the dangerous pandemic and changed this into an endemic virus like a cold or flu.

Source for how the vaccine "accelerated the mutation process to omicron", please.

[Anachron]

As threads here go, this one isn't too bad. Only a couple of unnecessary jabs and a pretty decent exchange of ideas.

Just wait until a certain individual resorts to telling people to kill themselves, because they are losing the argument.

[TitsAlternative]

Interesting strawman - but not unexpected coming from a pseudointellectual who just parrots MSM talking points.

I see you are confusing "vaccine" and "experimental gene therapy" as well.

You might want to educate yourself on the subject at hand before you comment.

If you have novel research to share, publish it. If you have problems with MSM, write them a letter.

[Dave22reborn]

I didn't read through the whole thread, but you always tend to focus strictly on death too much. The original virus was lethal almost exclusively to the old and sickly, but it caused a lot of very severe disease for all types of people at the start. The lockdowns in 3/20 were to prevent hospital overruns and to spare healthcare resources, not just strictly to prevent deaths. I know many younger, healthy people, including kids, that ended up hospitalized (my daughter's friend was a 14 year old competitive gymnast and was hospitalized for 2 weeks at the very start of it).

The virus is different now, though, and has been since the omicron mutation. I was for the vaccine when it first came out (although against mandates), but now there is no reason to encourage vaccination for anyone who is not at-risk (i.e. sick or elderly). If you want to get it completely voluntarily, go ahead, though, whatever, nothing wrong with that. The CT autists have also, of course, completely exaggerated the risks as well.

The vaccine really did its job by targeting the original virus and accelerating the mutation process to the omicron version that more or less ended the dangerous pandemic and changed this into an endemic virus like a cold or flu.

You didn't encourage for people to get the vaccine, you were screeching at us to get the vaccine, calling us selfish *******s, and to think of your sickly cousin.

You were someone who was duped into believing that it would kill the spread, then you told us all that the unvaccinated were going to create a super variant, just because we were unvaccinated.

[Jayarbie]

Fyi, I don't know if it was this thread or some other about this stuff -- we saw some data on the many long side effects from covid (thanks JLC)

They did not break it down by age or health, so it's hard to say for sure... Buuut, they did break it down by those who did not go to the hospital, those who went to the ICU and those who went to the hospital but weren't so bad they ended up in the ICU.

To no real surprise, the group blasted the hardest was the ICU group, the hospital-only generally halved and then the non-hospital groups very small.

Which, it might be a couple leaps too many to make, but I took from this that the ones having the most problems with lingering health issues was for the most part the same groups dying (elderly, sickly). You'd expect healthier people would not end up in either the hospital or the ICU and that group made up a very small part of the overall numbers.

As threads here go, this one isn't too bad. Only a couple of unnecessary jabs and a pretty decent exchange of ideas.

Yes, it's not surprising that the hospitalization rate would be higher for the at-risk groups as well, but for all groups, there was enough of an elevated risk that just a nominal increase in less at-risk threatened a breakdown of the healthcare system (in the US and globally). Had this just "made the rounds" in the US in the spring of 2020, the potential need for hospital beds was several times higher than the actual hospital bed census available in the whole country. That is more related to lockdowns than vaccines, tough, as obviously, there was no vaccine at the time. The pandemic could have been handled much better in general, though, and the lockdowns should have been able to be ended by summer of 2020, but by then, the Floyd riots and presidential election had everything overpoliticized and both sides dug into as extreme of a position as possible to virtue signal for their "team".