171–180 of 229 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a section in there “RESPONDING TO OBJECTIONS” to VAERS data. The CDC is not looking at absolute numbers.
For good reasons, which is why it is a peculiar choice of highlight for the criminal justice lecturer's substack article. You haven't supported your prior claim by linking it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
It’s a shame dang doesn’t nuke these disinformation agents from orbit.
I would also point out another commenter you are implicitly aligning yourself with in this discussion stated the IFR of Covid is 1-2% (or 1,000-2,000 per 100,000 using their notation). That my friend is pure disinformation!
I’d be curious if you have any comment of mine that you can point to which is disinformation, especially in comparison the the blatant example of the IFR.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except for me and many others long covid symptoms got worse after vaccination. Additionally new research is uncovering serious and significant risks for the vaccine with fairly marginal protection benefits.
I assume this is collecting some downvotes because it's unclear if the second sentence is supposed to apply specifically to the long covid population or the general population. Based on the submitted paper, if it is intended to apply specifically to the long covid population, then it seems to be a reasonable comment. It did mention post-long-covid vaccinations seemed to be more harmful than helpful - something like ~…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And, exercise makes it worse for some people. So "push through" is a possibly terrible idea.
Seems like long COVID and CFS are being conflated here.
Like CFS, "pushing through" can worsen symptoms - permanently.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The VA is almost nothing but old sick people, the demographic most susceptible to serious COVID. Fortunately, most of the population isn't old sick people. The study you reference isn't relevant to conversations about the general population. The view that risk from subsequent infections is negligible is informed by the fact that vast numbers of people have had subsequent infections , including most of the people they…
things cant be 'manifestly not the case' without evidence
> Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma when jumping from aircraft: randomized controlled trial
> Conclusions Parachute use did not reduce death or major traumatic injury when jumping from aircraft in the first randomized evaluation of this intervention. However, the trial was only able to enroll participants on small stationary aircraft on the ground, suggesting cautious extrapolation to high altitude jumps. When beliefs regarding the effectiveness of an intervention exist in the community, randomized trials might selectively enroll individuals with a lower perceived likelihood of benefit, thus diminishing the applicability of the results to clinical practice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>As far as I can tell, everyone is going to get COVID Not if everyone gets antibodies first.
I had the initial two Pfizer shots, then a Moderna booster. Had a strong immune reaction to the second and third shot. Still got Covid 7 months later. Unless people are very careful, I suspect everyone is going to get it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I can’t believe we are still arguing about IFR at this at this point in the pandemic. It’s now well studied and we know the shape as a function of age is a huge hockey stick and the population average is not 1.1%. I suspect you understand well that your information is misleading and disinformation.
The only one arguing with the well studied is you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can’t believe we are still arguing about IFR at this at this point in the pandemic. It’s now well studied and we know the shape as a function of age is a huge hockey stick and the population average is not 1.1%. I suspect you understand well that your information is misleading and disinformation.
I didn't say the population average was 1.1%. I said 1.1% of covid cases. I even provided a link to my source. The only one arguing with the well studied is you.
That’s you. You imply IFR and now admit it is at least 5-10x lower.
You are not arguing in good faith.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't say the population average was 1.1%. I said 1.1% of covid cases. I even provided a link to my source. The only one arguing with the well studied is you.
> The frequency of death from covid is somewhere in the range of 1000-2000 in 100,000 people. That’s you. You imply IFR and now admit it is at least 5-10x lower. You are not arguing in good faith.
It is verifiably true that the death rate of covid is 1.1% in the U.S. Do you have a different definition of "death rate"?
> now admit it is at least 5-10x lower Never did I say anything to this effect. So who is really arguing in bad faith?