Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: CV and mad panic behaviour (Read 939923 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 64 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4470 –
Saw this today, thought it was worth repeating in regards to NSW;
Quote from: Dr Sara Marzouk, Aug 18, 2021
There is a lag of 2-3 weeks between case numbers and increased hospitalisations and deaths.
The 391 people in hospital, and the 66 people in ICU, are the culmination of figures 2-3 weeks ago when the daily numbers were half of what we are reporting today.
Also for those still banging on about being Anti-COVID-19 vaccination, this from a US Hospital on the 18th of Aug.


Notice the trend?
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"
 

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4471 –
Who are the anti vaxxers?

2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4473 –
Quote from: LP – on
Whoever can get it, and yet won't!
So the people who don't line up for the latest iphone for 12 hours before it is launched are anti-iphone??

Thats a BS call.

Plenty of reasons that people who are eligible but have not yet got it yet.....and lumping everyone in as anti-vaxxers shows about as much understanding as actual anti-vaxxers

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4474 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
Plenty of reasons that people who are eligible but have not yet got it yet.....and lumping everyone in as anti-vaxxers shows about as much understanding as actual anti-vaxxers
"Won't" is not the same as "can't", "can't yet", "will" or "will later!" ;)
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4475 –
Meanwhile, data out of Israel shows that vaccine 'efficacy' past 6 months is poor.

Note the roll out of the 'booster' narrative in the MSM....

Yet, no safety data on a 3rd jab (or the inevitable 4th, 5th, 6th.....). I'm sure LP can identify the arithmetic sequence .... O0
Finals, then 4 in a row!

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4476 –
Quote from: LP – on
Whoever can get it, and yet won't!

Okay. I got the Pfizer jab but I don't want my wife to get the Astra. Am I an anti vaxxer?
2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4478 –
Quote from: madbluboy – on
Okay. I got the Pfizer jab but I don't want my wife to get the Astra. Am I an anti vaxxer?

Not an anti vaxxer, but maybe not relying on the best available information to make a decision IMO. I would check with your wife's GP, and see what they say. They may on certain occasions recommend one or the other.

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4479 –
Quote from: Professer E – on
Half of Melbourne took advantage of the nice weather this weekend to have a jolly down the Bellarine.   This "lock down" is an utter joke.

A friend of mine from Barwon Heads has a 4WD with the name of a car dealer from Werribee on the number plate trim.  An outraged local keyed his 4WD 🙄

I haven’t noticed much in the way of extra traffic and I had to prove that I was a local before I could get a coffee.
It's still the Gulf of Mexico, Don Old!

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4480 –
Quote from: PaulP – on
Not an anti vaxxer, but maybe not relying on the best available information to make a decision IMO. I would check with your wife's GP, and see what they say. They may on certain occasions recommend one or the other.

The government website says
The Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) recommends the COVID-19 vaccine by Pfizer (Comirnaty) is preferred in adults aged under 60 years.
In people 60 years and over, ATAGI continue to advise that the benefits of vaccination with the AstraZeneca vaccine outweigh the risks associated with vaccination.
This recommendation is based on:

the increasing risk of severe outcomes from COVID-19 in older adults (and hence a higher benefit from vaccination), and
the increased risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia following AstraZeneca vaccine in those under 60 years.
There appears to be a small risk of TTS in people 60 years and over, but this risk appears to be lower than in younger people. Cases overseas have been reported at all ages.

If you are under 60 years of age and have already had your first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine, and did not experience abnormal side effects, ATAGI recommends you still receive your second AstraZeneca dose. This will provide you with greater coverage against severe illness from COVID-19.

People who are considering vaccination with AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine should be aware of this potential complication as part of providing informed consent.

The COVID-19 AstraZeneca vaccine can be used in adults aged under 60 years where the benefits clearly outweigh the risk for that individual and the person has made an informed decision based on an understanding of the risks and benefits.

If you are aged 18-59 years of age, you can choose to receive the AstraZeneca vaccine:

following an appropriate assessment of suitability by a qualified health professional; and
if you provide verbal or written consent.
2012 HAPPENED!!!!!!!

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4481 –
“In today's CoronaCheck, we explain how statistics concerning COVID-19 cases among vaccinated people can mislead.”

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-06/coronacheck-israel-higher-numbers-vaccinated-people-infected/100353540

It’s always good to have an expert untangle the metrics 🙂😷
It's still the Gulf of Mexico, Don Old!

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4482 –
Quote from: madbluboy – on
The government website says
The Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) recommends the COVID-19 vaccine by Pfizer (Comirnaty) is preferred in adults aged under 60 years.
In people 60 years and over, ATAGI continue to advise that the benefits of vaccination with the AstraZeneca vaccine outweigh the risks associated with vaccination.
This recommendation is based on:

the increasing risk of severe outcomes from COVID-19 in older adults (and hence a higher benefit from vaccination), and
the increased risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia following AstraZeneca vaccine in those under 60 years.
There appears to be a small risk of TTS in people 60 years and over, but this risk appears to be lower than in younger people. Cases overseas have been reported at all ages.

If you are under 60 years of age and have already had your first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine, and did not experience abnormal side effects, ATAGI recommends you still receive your second AstraZeneca dose. This will provide you with greater coverage against severe illness from COVID-19.

People who are considering vaccination with AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine should be aware of this potential complication as part of providing informed consent.

The COVID-19 AstraZeneca vaccine can be used in adults aged under 60 years where the benefits clearly outweigh the risk for that individual and the person has made an informed decision based on an understanding of the risks and benefits.

If you are aged 18-59 years of age, you can choose to receive the AstraZeneca vaccine:

following an appropriate assessment of suitability by a qualified health professional; and
if you provide verbal or written consent.

We've had this discussion many times before, and there seems little point in rehashing it. People who have convinced themselves that the Pfizer is better / safer / less dangerous will continue to believe that, and act accordingly.

The AZ is based on old, tried and true technology. Once you've had your shots, and had no issues, you should be comfortable in the knowledge that long term effects have been ironed out. The Pfizer is based on mRNA technology - this technology is newer, and before covid, was limited in use to test rats and the like, and also in human clinical trials for rabies and influenza. The first time they were available on a mass scale and approved for use in humans on such a scale was covid. Long term effects of such technology on a large scale is simply not known. The scientific community is not expecting any issues, but there's no way of knowing for sure.

So mbb, if you wake up one day and you've morphed into a 30cm plastic Arnie action figure, complete with face paint and a button on the back that calls out "chill out dickwad !" when you press it, look no further.  :D

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4483 –
Quote from: flyboy77 – on
Meanwhile, data out of Israel shows that vaccine 'efficacy' past 6 months is poor.
No it doesn't.

Efficacy doesn't just mean "complete prevention" or "complete resistance", that inference is just a gross generalisation vaccine cynics make.

Efficacy is a compound measure of what a vaccine does to reduce transmission, prevent infection and prevent severe disease. Which is the exact point of the message from Saratosa Memorial Hospital was making with it's chart above.

Just as the Influenza vaccine do not stop everyone getting the flu, the Sars-CoV-2 vaccines won't stop everyone getting COVID-19. But all the vaccines are very efficacious at reducing transmission, reducing infections and preventing severe disease. Which then reduces hospitalisations, reduces ICU admissions and reduces the need for ventilation. ;)

Finally, if you have a high percentage of the population already vaccinated, in Israel's case more than 80%, and a new variant starts to infect people, you will ironically have more vaccinated people being infected than unvaccinated people being infected because it's just either simple count or a percentage reported without regard to the severity of the cases or the otherwise healthy.       Hmmm, I think it's called arithmetic! ;D
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #4484 –
Quote from: DJC – on
“In today's CoronaCheck, we explain how statistics concerning COVID-19 cases among vaccinated people can mislead.”

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-06/coronacheck-israel-higher-numbers-vaccinated-people-infected/100353540

It’s always good to have an expert untangle the metrics 🙂😷
The following bit was probably the most informative, because it turns the Social Media tactics back on themselves.
Quote
In her blog post Professor McGowan outlined a situation in which 90 per cent of a group of 20 people were vaccinated. Four people in the group contracted COVID-19, including two who were unvaccinated and two who were, which means that 50 per cent of the infections were among vaccinated people.

By another measure, however, the same scenario showed that 100 per cent of unvaccinated people got sick, compared to just 11 per cent of vaccinated people.

In this case, the vaccine would be seen to be 89 per cent effective.
How many football pitches is that?
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"