Posts by jadetinker85

nimbleranger17 said:How much longer are we going to tolerate these absolutely deranged, fabricated conspiracy theories that anyone could debunk with literally ten seconds of Googling?



Are you intentionally spreading these blatant falsehoods about hundreds of people dying daily in Israel, or what?

I am sick to death of these lies.🤮

Why use an October chart when they’re clearly at the end of a wave now? Use the data from August 9, 2021, like I asked.

Or maybe I should just post it myself?

slystag4 said:Just imagine how many vaccinated people would have died if 95 percent of the adult population had been immunized.

And then again, one might wonder how many unvaccinated individuals passed away who perhaps wouldn't have, given this specific vaccination rate.

Right. Back to those "brilliant" conclusions again. So, the logic goes: if high vaccination—say 70 or 80%—hits herd immunity, then COVID deaths should be zero, just like polio or TB.

🍿

No. Even with 90% coverage, we wouldn't be looking at 22,291 infections, nor would there be 56 deaths like what happened in Israel back in September 2001.

briskjackal5 said:It feels like you didn't really answer any of the questions, though. 🤔

Like, what does "acceptable" actually mean in the context of your last question? 🤔

What kind of implications or context are we talking about? What’s the actual difference between an "acceptable" number and an "unacceptable" one?

Maybe try walking me through an example.
Let's say in a city of 10,000 people, we estimate a hundred might die if we don't vaccinate, or maybe just ten if we do.
And then we decide that's either "unacceptable" (or "acceptable").
So... what do we actually do with a conclusion like that? 😁

-Steve

Hmm, look at Israel. By September, they had thousands of infections and hundreds of deaths despite high vaccination rates. Things only started stabilizing recently with the third dose, though it seems they have other measures in place too.

How many vaccinated deaths are "acceptable" to me? Not a single one. It's like traveling to a region where malaria is rampant. You get the shot... but in the end, your fate still rests on whether a mosquito bites you or not. So why bother with the vaccine at all?

Susan Jackson said:Trying to reach herd immunity with a vaccine this ineffective is like trying to fill a bucket with a massive hole in the bottom.
Can anyone run the actual math here to show what percentage of coverage is required to achieve true herd immunity?
Just eyeballing it, it feels like we’d need about 230%, give or take 30%.
Looks like we’re breaking the laws of physics at this rate.☕

Seems like you've got a point. At 230% vaccination rates—plus if we start vaccinating our golden retrievers against COVID and every other outbreak—we might finally get there.🙂

briskjackal5 said:slystag4: I guess if you ask me, it’s just one of those things where everything feels a bit more intense than it actually is! Maybe? But anyway, Quincy was saying something earlier that really got me thinking about how much stuff changes when you look at it from a different angle. It’s wild! I mean, seriously, it’s kind of crazy how we perceive things, right? I don't know, I might be overthinking it, but it feels like such a huge deal!

I guess I'm just going to jump right in here! So, I was thinking about all this lately, and honestly, maybe I'm overthinking it, but wow... there is just so much to unpack! It’s kind of wild when you really sit down and look at the details, isn't it? I mean, I don't know, I might be totally off base here, but it feels like everything is shifting so fast! Anyway, I just wanted to share that little thought with everyone. Hope you're all having a wonderful day! slystag4 says: So, he's telling me that the vaccine's effectiveness is, like, super questionable. I mean, I guess he really thinks that, right? It's just his take on it, I suppose!

So, what's that efficiency rating actually looking like? What is he saying about it?

slystag4: I mean, I was just thinking about what Quincy said earlier, and honestly? It’s such a good point. I guess maybe I didn't see it that way at first, but looking back, it totally makes sense! I'm just so excited to dive deeper into this. It feels like we're finally getting somewhere, you know? Maybe it's just me, but I'm feeling really pumped about where this conversation is heading!

Yeah. 😁

I mean, if you ask me, that little flaw? It’s probably going to be hanging around for a long, long time. I guess we'll just have to see, but my gut tells me it's here to stay.

I mean, you really need like, 25 seconds just to wrap your head around it, right? And honestly, that's usually way too big of a mouthful to swallow all at once. I guess!

Yeah!

slystag4: I mean, I guess if you look at what Quincy was saying, it’s kind of interesting, right? Maybe? It feels like we're all just circling the same idea, but I don't know! I honestly think there's more to it than that, though. Like, maybe we should consider how things actually play out in the real world, not just on paper. It’s just a thought! I might be totally off base here, but I really feel like we need to dig a little deeper into this whole situation. It’s such a wild topic, isn't it?!

I mean, I guess they really should be protected by a much higher percentage, don't you think? Maybe it just feels like we need more coverage than what's being offered right now.

What exactly does a "higher" percentage even mean in this context? I guess I might be overthinking it, but I'm a little confused!
Greater than what percentage, I guess? Maybe you could be a bit more specific there!

So, what’s the deal with that whole "should" phrasing? Like, when someone says they "should" do something, I guess it's kind of a fuzzy area, right? It’s not quite a "must," but it's definitely more than just a "maybe." It’s like that weird middle ground where there's an expectation or a suggestion hanging in the air, but nobody is actually forcing your hand! It can mean anything from a polite recommendation to a heavy sense of duty, depending on how you look at it, I suppose. It's such a tricky little phrase!
Where exactly does it say that, though? And honestly, how do you even decide what's actually "supposed" to happen in the first place? I mean, how do we even figure out the right way to go about it? It’s all a bit fuzzy, I guess! 🤔

So, I was wondering, what’s the actual percentage of people who haven't been vaccinated yet? And like, how are the Buggs doing compared to the Englishman? I guess it would be interesting to see those numbers! 🤔

briskjackal5

What's your point there?

The goal is herd immunity. What exact percentage of the population needs to be vaccinated to reach that threshold?

And at what level of mortality becomes acceptable in places where vaccination rates are high?

Nicholas King said:Do you honestly not realize that you just completely dug your own grave here? 🤣

So, you fixate on data from Israel and then casually admit you were "convinced" there should have been hundreds of deaths alongside that many infections? By the way—those "hundreds of deaths" you just made up out of thin air aren't just "a bit more," they're nearly ten times higher than what actually happened...

Setting aside the fact that you're hysterically waving around "data" that is really just a byproduct of your own "convictions" and assumptions: did it ever occur to you that the reason they don't have those hundreds of deaths you're so certain about is precisely due to high vaccination rates?

And so, that very same Israel you were using as proof that vaccines are useless ended up biting you right in the ass.

Sure. That’s one way to look at it. Personally, I still think the low death toll compared to infection numbers is because their healthcare system is incomparably better than ours.
Then again, you could argue it's the result of high vaccination rates. But over here, quite a few vaccinated people are dying—assuming that stat is right, where 80 out of 177 deaths were vaccinated.

slystag4 said:A total disaster. Kids are going to end up protecting the very people who couldn't care less about them, let alone anyone else. So, dear parents—and I guess we should include the grandparents who refused to get vaccinated—you are directly responsible for this shift to remote learning. It must feel great, I'm sure. 🙂

How can you claim kids are only protecting selfish people when 80 out of last week's 177 deaths were vaccinated?
Kids protect the vaccinated too.

nimbleranger17 said:Just thought I’d give the community and the mods a little look at how soks behaves when he gets caught red-handed in a blatant lie:



Basically, instead of having even an ounce of integrity and just owning up to his mistake, he decides to pull the most shameless move possible—editing his own post to pretend he never said it in the first place. Luckily enough, I managed to quote him before he could scrub the evidence, so you can see the sheer audacity of the deception right here; then, to make matters even more pathetic, he tries to delete the specific parts of the quote where he’s lying, all without offering a single word of apology or showing any actual remorse for being dishonest.

It’s honestly hard to wrap my head around the fact that people like this are even allowed to participate in a forum like this.
I’ve reached a point where I truly feel like there’s nothing left for me to do here if this is the caliber of discourse we're dealing with.

Why are you riding me so hard? I already explained my reasoning above regarding why I thought there would be more deaths alongside 11,000 infections.🤷

unknown:

Fine, I was clearly convinced that with 11,000 infections, the death toll should have been higher... if we compare it to our infection-to-death ratio. But they obviously have better healthcare, so despite the high number of new cases, there were only 56 deaths. But with such high vaccination rates, that shouldn't really happen, right?

Go argue with your wife. I don't know what else to tell you. 🤷

nimbleranger17 said:Let’s go over this for the fourth time now, shall we? Why on earth would you insist on fabricating those numbers regarding the hundreds of daily deaths in Israel when it’s nothing more than a complete work of fiction?

Fine. I clearly assumed that with 11,000 infections, the death toll would be higher... if we’re looking at the ratio we see here in the States. But hey, they probably just have better healthcare, so despite the massive spike in cases, deaths topped out at 56.
But with vaccination rates that high, that shouldn't be happening, right?

By the way, how many vaccinated and recovered people does it actually take to hit herd immunity?

nimbleranger17 said:Honestly, man, are you actually kidding me right now? Are you just straight-up mocking common sense?

On this very graph right here, you can see September 8, 2021, along with every single other date since the pandemic kicked off.

Don't try to pull this nonsense on me by pretending you don't know how to read a basic chart. 🤦🤦🤦🤦

It’s hard to pin down the exact peak on September 8th, but here’s what things looked like by September 11th.

https://ibb.co/Y2kFmHd

And here is the shot from September 13th.

https://ibb.co/HDLG6hc

Also, check out September 8, 2001.

https://ibb.co/m85NRxY

nimbleranger17 said:Honestly, why the blatant fabrication? Look, for heaven's sake, this graph covers the entire pandemic period from the very start: https://i.ibb.co/pRM1zt9/iiii-Untitled.png

It’s perfectly clear if you actually bother to look—at no point in the last eight months has the death toll even touched 60, and we never saw 100 deaths, not even before the vaccinations rolled out. So, I have to ask, why the dishonesty?

Why are you just making things up and peddling these absolute fabrications regarding the death toll in Israel?

And why the outright lies about zero tuberculosis deaths?

Once more, I am asking you nicely: just post the image from September 8, 2021.

Is it really that much to ask? 🍿

nimbleranger17 said:Honestly, why the blatant fabrication? Look, for heaven's sake, this graph covers the entire pandemic period from the very start: https://i.ibb.co/pRM1zt9/iiii-Untitled.png

It’s perfectly clear if you actually bother to look—at no point in the last eight months has the death toll even touched 60, and we never saw 100 deaths, not even before the vaccinations rolled out. So, I have to ask, why the dishonesty?

Why are you just making things up and peddling these absolute fabrications regarding the death toll in Israel?

And why the outright lies about zero tuberculosis deaths?

Look, I'm asking nicely—just post the image from September 8, 2021.

Is that really too much to ask? 🍿

Does it make sense to you that people get vaccinated to build immunity, only to end up getting sick—or dying—from that exact same disease? 🕺
They’re supposed to have a much higher level of protection.
If I go through the trouble of getting a shot, I’m operating under the assumption that I won't face severe illness or death from it. 🕺

What’s the threshold for herd immunity? 70% or 80%? If that's the case, what was going on in Israel before they started rolling out those third boosters? Now I see their infection numbers are down to about 300, but back in the summer, the infection and death rates were massive.

briskjackal5 said:I mean, what does your brain even tell you when you see stats like that? 🤔

Not maybe, I'd say definitely.

Some folks over 65 aren't exactly math wizards when it comes to interpreting data, and they're probably being influenced by others who are even worse with numbers.

-Steve

It tells me vaccine efficacy is highly questionable.

Kenneth Brown5 said:Are you seriously assuming none of those 717 people are vaccinated? Like you think being vaccinated makes someone totally invincible to catching it?
We don't actually know how many of those 717 are vaxxed, probably because that data doesn't fit the narrative they want to push for the vaccination drive.

It was pretty telling what Berosev mentioned during Friday's press conference: "In the last 7 days, 177 people over 65 passed away, and 97 of them weren't vaccinated."
That means 80 of those people were actually vaccinated.
We're seeing similar patterns with the younger crowd under 65 too.

And honestly, you shouldn't be playing doctor and deciding who needs the shot and who doesn't.
The virus keeps mutating regardless of which age group it hits.
Maybe those numbers for the seniors are actually an argument against the current approach for some folks.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy A50 using Tapatalk

Pointing at facts is pointless here. For the folks who decided the vaccine is a magic bullet, hearing that 80 out of 177 deaths were vaccinated just goes in one ear and out the other. It doesn't stick.🕺

mellowskipper said:Well, why wouldn't it be negative? It's not like every other virus just vanished from the face of the earth, I suppose.

Sent from my JNY-LX1 using Reddit

Because she spent a few days living with people who have since tested positive. She moved out once the first person in the house started showing symptoms. They're all positive now, and while she has a fever, her home test came back negative.

boldotter2 said:Why don't we just start letting kids do self-testing, like they do over in Canada or Mexico? You get results in 15 minutes, it’s just a quick swab in the nose, way less invasive than a PCR, and I guess the accuracy is more than enough. They only cost about 50-$20.
Instead, they'll probably just let everything spiral out of control so we can have that classic showdown again—the geniuses in the emergency headquarters versus the geniuses on the internet. Just endless nonsense and pointless arguments.

If they would just test the kids who show up to school with symptoms, I think they’d actually see better results in slowing down the spread than all those other measures combined.
I honestly get the feeling they want to trigger maximum chaos over the next month just to ramp up the fear factor for people who aren't vaccinated. It's happening through the kids again.

Are you sure those tests actually work? My niece is in isolation right now with a fever of 99.5, she took one, and it came back negative. We're pretty skeptical about them.

David Palmer5 said:Okay, look, she won't be taking the state exams since she isn't in 5th or 8th grade, but I don't quite get why a kid who is highly successful both in school and out would panic over tests that personally have zero impact on her grades or her future success.🤔
Just explain to her what the state exams are actually for, and that should be that.

Besides, I think it's better to teach her how to manage panic rather than encouraging her to just dodge every stressful situation she faces.
What happens if she decides to apply to a high school that requires an entrance exam? Is she just going to skip the test and enroll in a school she isn't even interested in just to avoid the stress?

Most kids panic before any kind of test or oral exam.
Even when they've done all the prep work.

coastalorca43 said:Honestly, it might be more effective if they actually educated people on maintaining nasal hygiene and keeping humidity levels up at home during the winter, instead of just repeating that "get vaccinated" mantra all over the news.

That would definitely be a smart move. Lauc mentioned something similar back in March last year when Corona first hit. I actually listened—bought two humidifiers that run non-stop, and this year, nobody in my house has even caught a cold. Mind you, I usually deal with ragweed allergies, so by September I'm typically choking on mucus unless I get ahead of it with Tafen nasal or Nazonex... but this year? Absolutely nothing. I'm guessing my nasal mucosa just finally recovered. 🤷

Or maybe there's some miracle where ragweed isn't an issue in Washington, D.C. anymore. 🤷

Or maybe some other miracle happened where my allergy, which I've had for over a decade, just vanished. 🤷

Susan Martin4 said:On one hand, I think it’s just plain nonsensical to reopen nightclubs and bars where people crowd together, while on the other, we're forcing kids into remote learning at home.

Sure. They basically decided to trigger a massive wave as soon as possible, though predicting what measures come next is a toss-up. Given the tourist season and how long immunity lasts, that big spike should have hit around December, not now at the end of September. Then again, maybe the toll will be lighter—once heating season kicks in, people's nasal passages dry out, weakening that natural defense against respiratory viruses.