akvanden Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 2 minutes ago, ArcticCrusher said: Most in hospital are not even there for covid but tested. The only true valid measurement is death rate, so go check that stat. Yet here you are, posting the hospitalization data. Don't like it now? 3 minutes ago, ArcticCrusher said: But let's examine your data here, what is the benefit of getting boosted? The benefits are real world examples to show your incompetence. So far so good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArcticCrusher Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 Here is a Danish Study comparing mRNA Pfizer and Moderna. Where is the benefit? No calculator required. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArcticCrusher Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 1 minute ago, akvanden said: Yet here you are, posting the hospitalization data. Don't like it now? The benefits are real world examples to show your incompetence. So far so good. No I don't care about it when its well known most people are not in the hospital with covid. Dead is dead that's all that matters in the long term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akvanden Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 14 minutes ago, ArcticCrusher said: No I don't care about it when its well known most people are not in the hospital with covid. Dead is dead that's all that matters in the long term. Then do us all a favor and stop posting about it then. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roosting Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 3 hours ago, akvanden said: So much math illiteracy, I can't keep up. Got those easy calculations completed that confirm or deny the 94% effective claims. You said it was easy so I'm excited to see your results you claim to be able to easily compute. Those claims were what the government used to entice participation in the program. So was it a lie you were sold on ? Dont you want to know if your government openly lied to you to take something they knew absolutely nothing about and relied on second hand info to promote it? Then we can move on to other metrics to see what the real effectiveness is across the range of doses and boosters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akvanden Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Roosting said: Got those easy calculations completed that confirm or deny the 94% effective claims. You said it was easy so I'm excited to see your results you claim to be able to easily compute. Those claims were what the government used to entice participation in the program. So was it a lie you were sold on ? Dont you want to know if your government openly lied to you to take something they knew absolutely nothing about and relied on second hand info to promote it? Then we can move on to other metrics to see what the real effectiveness is across the range of doses and boosters. So....... you're wanting to go back through the clinical trials and recalculate the efficacy math from 2 years ago on the original strain, and then somehow compare that to omicron in today's hospitalizations? No idea what you're asking, nor do you. Simple fractions are easy to calculate. Rates between the groups are easy to calculate when provided the breakdown. Unfortunately, we go off of whatever metrics (or lack thereof) when AC, or IRV, or whomever post. AC posts hospitalization data, promotes it, discusses it, then when realizes it's not what he thinks it is, then states it doesn't even matter. This is what we do in the covid forum. No one learns, so it's similar to a merry go round where the same things get posted over and over and over. Did you check my work on the 3x rate? I reposted it just for you. Were you humored? Edited April 28, 2022 by akvanden Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roosting Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 1 hour ago, akvanden said: So....... you're wanting to go back through the clinical trials and recalculate the efficacy math from 2 years ago on the original strain, and then somehow compare that to omicron in today's hospitalizations? No idea what you're asking, nor do you. Simple fractions are easy to calculate. Rates between the groups are easy to calculate when provided the breakdown. Unfortunately, we go off of whatever metrics (or lack thereof) when AC, or IRV, or whomever post. AC posts hospitalization data, promotes it, discusses it, then when realizes it's not what he thinks it is, then states it doesn't even matter. This is what we do in the covid forum. No one learns, so it's similar to a merry go round where the same things get posted over and over and over. Did you check my work on the 3x rate? I reposted it just for you. Were you humored? I gave you the metrics to calculate and it appears you are ignoring that post. You claim some sort of intellectual competency and than act the fool when unable to back up your inability to put up or shut up. You work on the 3x rate is grade 3 just like the entirety of you drivel here. I've made the claim before that you are to stupid to debate with keep it up and confirm it again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akvanden Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Roosting said: I gave you the metrics to calculate and it appears you are ignoring that post. You claim some sort of intellectual competency and than act the fool when unable to back up your inability to put up or shut up. You didn't provide anything. You just gave an old efficacy number and then I guess you want a new efficacy number? You could show me what you mean though, right? Like a formula or something? Let me guess, you can't, or won't, or something along those lines? 14 minutes ago, Roosting said: You work on the 3x rate is grade 3 just like the entirety of you drivel here. I know, right?!? I don't understand why they don't get it. You get it though - 3x higher hospitalization rate in unvaccinated using ACs numbers. Easy math. 14 minutes ago, Roosting said: I've made the claim before that you are to stupid to debate with keep it up and confirm it again. There's nothing to debate, they're just numbers. Edited April 28, 2022 by akvanden Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roosting Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 1 hour ago, akvanden said: You didn't provide anything. You just gave an old efficacy number and then I guess you want a new efficacy number? You could show me what you mean though, right? Like a formula or something? Let me guess, you can't, or won't, or something along those lines? I know, right?!? I don't understand why they don't get it. You get it though - 3x higher hospitalization rate in unvaccinated using ACs numbers. Easy math. There's nothing to debate, they're just numbers. Thanks for the confirmation on your stupidity. Please continue to display your superior ability in that area. Please keep going. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deephaven Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 Love how when real numbers are pointed out the Twitter crew won't respond and instead make personal attacks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArcticCrusher Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 1 hour ago, akvanden said: So....... you're wanting to go back through the clinical trials and recalculate the efficacy math from 2 years ago on the original strain, and then somehow compare that to omicron in today's hospitalizations? No idea what you're asking, nor do you. Simple fractions are easy to calculate. Rates between the groups are easy to calculate when provided the breakdown. Unfortunately, we go off of whatever metrics (or lack thereof) when AC, or IRV, or whomever post. AC posts hospitalization data, promotes it, discusses it, then when realizes it's not what he thinks it is, then states it doesn't even matter. This is what we do in the covid forum. No one learns, so it's similar to a merry go round where the same things get posted over and over and over. Did you check my work on the 3x rate? I reposted it just for you. Were you humored? Ahem, the original Pfizer data showed 21 deaths in the vaxxed vs 17 in the placebo group. There was never a case to support the vax rollout. Period, not then and not now. The only thing that matters in the end is all case deaths. Sorry if you don't understand this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akvanden Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 6 minutes ago, ArcticCrusher said: Ahem, the original Pfizer data showed 21 deaths in the vaxxed vs 17 in the placebo group. There was never a case to support the vax rollout. Period, not then and not now. The only thing that matters in the end is all case deaths. Sorry if you don't understand this I believe you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArcticCrusher Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 8 minutes ago, akvanden said: I believe you. It's peer reviewed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roosting Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 2 hours ago, Deephaven said: Love how when real numbers are pointed out the Twitter crew won't respond and instead make personal attacks. If this is directed at me you are welcome to calculate the real world effectiveness and see if it comes close to 94%. arnt most of your posts just attacking while providing zero information to support any argument. speaking of dull......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArcticCrusher Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 35 minutes ago, Roosting said: If this is directed at me you are welcome to calculate the real world effectiveness and see if it comes close to 94%. arnt most of your posts just attacking while providing zero information to support any argument. speaking of dull......... This is how the simpletons cherry pick data. Its called the tunnel vision approach. Complete bullshit. They want to focus on 1 covid death in vaxxed compared to 2 in the unvaxxed as some great success and ignore the all cause death that shows there is zero benefit. Fucking dumb sheep. CLAIM: Because 14 people in Pfizer’s placebo group died and 15 people in the vaccinated group also died, Pfizer’s own data shows its COVID-19 vaccine does not reduce the risk of dying from the disease. THE FACTS: Those figures are irrelevant to the vaccine’s efficacy, as they are simply a tally of all deaths that occurred among participants in both the placebo and vaccine groups in Pfizer’s ongoing study. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deephaven Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 44 minutes ago, Roosting said: If this is directed at me you are welcome to calculate the real world effectiveness and see if it comes close to 94%. arnt most of your posts just attacking while providing zero information to support any argument. speaking of dull......... The only thing I have ever refuted is Lloyd's claim of negative efficacy...which is hilarious because all of his data shows the opposite. Doesn't even take into account that the high risk group is nearly 100% vaccinated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roosting Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 1 hour ago, Deephaven said: The only thing I have ever refuted is Lloyd's claim of negative efficacy...which is hilarious because all of his data shows the opposite. Doesn't even take into account that the high risk group is nearly 100% vaccinated. Here is a little tidbit for you to chew on: how is it that the vaccinated are more susceptible to infections if they are in contact with the unvaccinated as compared to if they interact with other vax? Isnt that counter to what the vax was for ? ie: preventing infections is the virus different in unvax? if the virus is in higher concentration due to no vax antibodies to fight then why isnt the unvax death rate way higher? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deephaven Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 Again off topic. You guys are so lost. And as for your question you are just making shit up again. If it isn't show some data . We know if Lloyd shares data it will just confirm what I stated so don't wait for him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArcticCrusher Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 19 minutes ago, Deephaven said: The only thing I have ever refuted is Lloyd's claim of negative efficacy...which is hilarious because all of his data shows the opposite. Doesn't even take into account that the high risk group is nearly 100% vaccinated. Did you get your PhD from the special prize in a Cracker Jack Box cause you are full of shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irv Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 Interesting. 946,330 cases in the fully vaccinated plus booster and only 941,467 cases in the unvaccinated. Add in the partially vaccinated number to the equation and that number increases to 1,038,364 cases. A 92,897 greater difference in vaccinated cases compared to the unvaccinated. Add in those who were vaccinated but because the experimental vaccine takes 2 weeks to work properly, allegedly, that number increases to 148,627 more cases in the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated. Can someone please tell me why again why I was foolish not to play Russian Roulette and get vaccinated??? Cases reported since the start of the vaccination campaign, as of April 10, 2022. Since the start of the vaccination campaign on December 14, 2020, PHAC received case-level vaccine history data for 72.1% (n=2,031,561) of COVID-19 cases aged 5 years or older. Of these cases: 941,467 (46.3%) were unvaccinated at the time of their episode date 51,730 (2.5%) were not yet protected by the vaccine 92,025 (4.5%) were only partially vaccinated 715,700 (35.2%) were fully vaccinated 230,639 (11.4%) were fully vaccinated with an additional dose Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deephaven Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 42 minutes ago, irv said: Interesting. 946,330 cases in the fully vaccinated plus booster and only 941,467 cases in the unvaccinated. Add in the partially vaccinated number to the equation and that number increases to 1,038,364 cases. A 92,897 greater difference in vaccinated cases compared to the unvaccinated. Add in those who were vaccinated but because the experimental vaccine takes 2 weeks to work properly, allegedly, that number increases to 148,627 more cases in the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated. Can someone please tell me why again why I was foolish not to play Russian Roulette and get vaccinated??? Cases reported since the start of the vaccination campaign, as of April 10, 2022. Since the start of the vaccination campaign on December 14, 2020, PHAC received case-level vaccine history data for 72.1% (n=2,031,561) of COVID-19 cases aged 5 years or older. Of these cases: 941,467 (46.3%) were unvaccinated at the time of their episode date 51,730 (2.5%) were not yet protected by the vaccine 92,025 (4.5%) were only partially vaccinated 715,700 (35.2%) were fully vaccinated 230,639 (11.4%) were fully vaccinated with an additional dose Thanks for proving that it does not have a negative efficacy. 55 minutes ago, ArcticCrusher said: Did you get your PhD from the special prize in a Cracker Jack Box cause you are full of shit. Even your buddies prove my point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akvanden Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 2 hours ago, Roosting said: If this is directed at me you are welcome to calculate the real world effectiveness and see if it comes close to 94%. arnt most of your posts just attacking while providing zero information to support any argument. speaking of dull......... How would you calculate that? Should I get a statistically significant amount of my friends to get vaccinated while only giving the other a placebo? They ran CLINICAL STUDIES to determine the efficacy against the original strain, and they also ran clinical studies with delta. Why you think another clinical study wouldn't be needed is to test real world against omicron..... 1 hour ago, irv said: Interesting. 946,330 cases in the fully vaccinated plus booster and only 941,467 cases in the unvaccinated. Add in the partially vaccinated number to the equation and that number increases to 1,038,364 cases. A 92,897 greater difference in vaccinated cases compared to the unvaccinated. Add in those who were vaccinated but because the experimental vaccine takes 2 weeks to work properly, allegedly, that number increases to 148,627 more cases in the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated. Can someone please tell me why again why I was foolish not to play Russian Roulette and get vaccinated??? Cases reported since the start of the vaccination campaign, as of April 10, 2022. Since the start of the vaccination campaign on December 14, 2020, PHAC received case-level vaccine history data for 72.1% (n=2,031,561) of COVID-19 cases aged 5 years or older. Of these cases: 941,467 (46.3%) were unvaccinated at the time of their episode date 51,730 (2.5%) were not yet protected by the vaccine 92,025 (4.5%) were only partially vaccinated 715,700 (35.2%) were fully vaccinated 230,639 (11.4%) were fully vaccinated with an additional dose Have you talked to Arctic yet? He wants to know if you understand. 2 hours ago, ArcticCrusher said: The only thing that matters in the end is all case deaths. Sorry if you don't understand this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArcticCrusher Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 59 minutes ago, Deephaven said: Thanks for proving that it does not have a negative efficacy. Even your buddies prove my point. What does the Pfizer data dump they were trying to hide for 75 years say? Stay strong moron. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deephaven Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 Ah, you have to change the subject when you don't understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deephaven Posted April 28, 2022 Share Posted April 28, 2022 Unless you are really dumb enough to think that the study will show a negative efficacy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.