Jump to content

I should have gambled of the Cov.


Wilbur
 Share

Recommended Posts

There have been 40 new billionaires created, all related to the virus. 

Wow.

In other news, the Daily Mail recently had an articled showing the CDC left out critical data when citing efficacy of boosters.  One group was "Adults 65 and younger but they omitted data from those aged 19-49.  Makes one wonder if the booster wasn't just a revenue generator. 

  • Awesome 3
  • Sad 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites



26 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

There have been 40 new billionaires created, all related to the virus. 

Wow.

In other news, the Daily Mail recently had an articled showing the CDC left out critical data when citing efficacy of boosters.  One group was "Adults 65 and younger but they omitted data from those aged 19-49.  Makes one wonder if the booster wasn't just a revenue generator. 

I think the booster has been beneficial and, as I approach 5 months since my booster, I hope a 4th shot is made available to me in the next few months.  In the UK, where they're much more on top of statistics than the USA, they're giving 4th shots to those 75 and older now.

Note that one piece of data that's not being reported is how many older or health-issue people are dying of COVID because they're catching it from 19-49 year olds.  That's one reason that 19-49 year olds need to be given the shots: herd protection.

Note that in Maryland, 90% of people age 5 and older are vaccinated and the death rate is 1/4 the national average: vaccinations and masks are working for us.

When you look at the data from 2022, even from anti-vaccine-mandate states like Mississippi, the boosted people make up half the deaths from COVID compared to the vaccinated-no booster population, even though there are more vaccinated people with booster shots than without and the boosted average an older age and with more other health problems:

image.png.c537dbfdae23b774125ca67a1263b304.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, MickinMD said:

I think the booster has been beneficial and, as I approach 5 months since my booster, I hope a 4th shot is made available to me in the next few months.  In the UK, where they're much more on top of statistics than the USA, they're giving 4th shots to those 75 and older now.

Note that one piece of data that's not being reported is how many older or health-issue people are dying of COVID because they're catching it from 19-49 year olds.  That's one reason that 19-49 year olds need to be given the shots: herd protection.

Note that in Maryland, 90% of people age 5 and older are vaccinated and the death rate is 1/4 the national average: vaccinations and masks are working for us.

When you look at the data from 2022, even from anti-vaccine-mandate states like Mississippi, the boosted people make up half the deaths from COVID compared to the vaccinated-no booster population, even though there are more vaccinated people with booster shots than without and the boosted average an older age and with more other health problems:

image.png.c537dbfdae23b774125ca67a1263b304.png

The article suggested the age group of 19-49 showed an insignificant efficacy of the booster.  I didn't write the article but when statistics are removed, one must question why. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

The article suggested the age group of 19-49 showed an insignificant efficacy of the booster.  I didn't write the article but when statistics are removed, one must question why. 

Must be a conspiracy?  Or someone is paying some one off?  Or ????  Has to be an answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wilbur said:

The article suggested the age group of 19-49 showed an insignificant efficacy of the booster.  I didn't write the article but when statistics are removed, one must question why. 

Other socially responsible activities???  This is much to complex an issue to assign one cause to the responses that some people want to see.

For example, is the data based on contracting the disease, or is it including the reduction of effects after catching it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

Must be a conspiracy?  Or someone is paying some one off?  Or ????  Has to be an answer.

Profit is a good motivator.  Where profit can be made, big Pharma will create a need. 

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Wilbur said:

Profit is a good motivator. 

So folks are ethically compromised when driven by greed?  Nothing new there.  

Luckily, the vaccination and boosters, unlike other ways to chase $$$, are actually quite effective and for the common good, so it's one of those things that is just good policy.  On the flip side, it does detract from sharing doses with poorer countries where the $$$ aren't the same.  I wonder what the incentives are to vax and boost the third world countries, versus focus just on the West?   I don't hear a lot of chatter from many parts of the spectrum looking for vaxxing and boosting places like Haiti or Somalia, but rather usually hear more about not vaxxing in the first place.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

So folks are ethically compromised when driven by greed?  Nothing new there.  

Luckily, the vaccination and boosters, unlike other ways to chase $$$, are actually quite effective and for the common good, so it's one of those things that is just good policy.  On the flip side, it does detract from sharing doses with poorer countries where the $$$ aren't the same.  I wonder what the incentives are to vax and boost the third world countries, versus focus just on the West?   I don't hear a lot of chatter from many parts of the spectrum looking for vaxxing and boosting places like Haiti or Somalia, but rather usually hear more about not vaxxing in the first place.  

I don't hear much about the socialist countries sending a lot of vaccine to the third world either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, maddmaxx said:

I don't hear much about the socialist countries sending a lot of vaccine to the third world either.

Heck, most Socialist states ARE third world countries.  Maybe China and India aren't 3rd world (China aligned in the 2nd world and India sort of a foot in both?).  

My guess is we're happy keeping the goods for ourselves :D  I'm not complaining too much as I prefer having a boost, and getting another in a few months, over getting COVID.  As most of my family and friends are in the West, I'm selfish like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Razors Edge said:

Must be a conspiracy?  Or someone is paying some one off?  Or ????  Has to be an answer.

"The Daily Mail has also been noted for its unreliability and widely criticised for its printing of sensationalist and inaccurate scare stories of science and medical research, "

They are also notable for their support of Nazi Germany immediately prior to WWII and other authoritarian regimes to this day.  It doesn't look to be objective at all, and does seem to completely disregard data it doesn't think will appeal to its readers or goes against editorial opinion.  It seems best to disregard any "science" published from them, and to consider them serving up opinion rather than news.  In other words, other media consensus is that the Daily Mail makes up "news" and lies to suit what it wants to spread.

There is a NY "newspaper" like that, too, the NY Post is also totally unreliable.

That said, it is hard to get the "real data".  Covid info may be overreported in some states, and underreported in others.  The majority opinion is that the data presented and analyzed gives an incomplete picture, but much better than "opinion" sources.  For the average Joe, comparing different news sites offers far and away the best take on what is happening.

I will get another booster when I qualify, as it is far safer than getting covid.  Yeah, I know I can still get it, but hopefully the effects of getting covid are muted if vaxxed and boosted.   If some rich folks got richer on an opportunity of this magnitude, that is just what happens.  The significant majority of hospitalized folks and the dying/dead still are composed of the unvaccinated and unboosted, that is not a contested fact anywhere. 

Following logic and sense seems the best play, and people will be people.  Can't applaud non-pharmaceutical folks who made a mint during covid times, but demonize the pharmaceutical folks who mobilized and developed the best protections we have currently, making their public companies a profit while they were at it.  That narrative being passed around seems a bit off when public companies are organized to make money by making a product that data proves works better than not getting that product.  We simply can't allow disinformation and anti-science propaganda to hamper efforts to minimize the spread and effect of covid.

I bet there is still money to be made off covid for savvy investor types, though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bag of Dicks said:

They are also notable for their support of Nazi Germany immediately prior to WWII

So was Henry Ford but we still buy cars from him.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Kzoo said:

So was Henry Ford but we still buy cars from him.

I don't, but because they are not the best-built vehicles.  Plus, I live in a city where only the stupid or obscenely rich have cars.

Years ago in Chicago, I had a gf who had an '87 Mustang she bought new.  It was a POS, always in the shop, left her stranded a bunch, and the three year warranty had expired.  I went with her a number of times to look at different cars, and all of them seemed better than that Mustang. 

She ended up buying a new '91 Mustang because it was a red that she liked and had a warranty.  It was in the shop all the time in the first 6 months.  I learned a lesson from her first Ford, and her second cemented it for me.  Yeah, carmakers can improve quality, I just haven't noticed anyone raving about the reliability of Fords to this day.  Also, bimbo cars suck, don't get a car based solely off of appearance.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bag of Dicks said:

I don't, but because they are not the best-built vehicles.  Plus, I live in a city where only the stupid or obscenely rich have cars.

Is Henry Ford like Walt Disney? Still "alive" and getting a cut of the action?

Hell, didn't the Brit Monarchy love the Nazis?  It wasn't a two way street, so they sort of had to choose the other side?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

Is Henry Ford like Walt Disney? Still "alive" and getting a cut of the action?

Hell, didn't the Brit Monarchy love the Nazis?  It wasn't a two way street, so they sort of had to choose the other side?

There are Fords about and making money from it still, I would bet.  I don't run in those really old money circles much, though.

The Nazis were supposedly trying to soften the brits up to develop a truce (advantage Germany) when they were rolling over Europe.  Hitler was sure it would happen, supposedly.  I watch WWII documentaries sometimes, you see.  It was a 'good' war for the USA, clear bad guys, uncontested manufacturing might, gained worldwide mega-influence, etc.  Plus, we won, you know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bag of Dicks said:

There are Fords about and making money from it still, I would bet.  I don't run in those really old money circles much, though.

The Nazis were supposedly trying to soften the brits up to develop a truce (advantage Germany) when they were rolling over Europe.  Hitler was sure it would happen, supposedly.  I watch WWII documentaries sometimes, you see.  It was a 'good' war for the USA, clear bad guys, uncontested manufacturing might, gained worldwide mega-influence, etc.  Plus, we won, you know?

Well, I'm sure at least one of my grand parents or great grand parents was racist or bigoted or in some way not very kind to "others". Gotta move past that, recognize that it had (has) an impact, and be better now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Bag of Dicks said:

It was a 'good' war for the USA, clear bad guys, uncontested manufacturing might, gained worldwide mega-influence, etc.  Plus, we won, you know?

I've been saying for years that the whole of American dominance, superiority, success, wealth, etc. is the direct result of a world decimated by war. The US can't hold that position without acknowledging that the other nations are currently regaining their status. We can't "go back". We are a part of a changing world and we can't continue to claim preeminence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, donkpow said:

I've been saying for years that the whole of American dominance, superiority, success, wealth, etc. is the direct result of a world decimated by war. The US can't hold that position without acknowledging that the other nations are currently regaining their status. We can't "go back". We are a part of a changing world and we can't continue to claim preeminence.

Why do you hate America (and, by default, Canada)?

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, donkpow said:

I've been saying for years that the whole of American dominance, superiority, success, wealth, etc. is the direct result of a world decimated by war. The US can't hold that position without acknowledging that the other nations are currently regaining their status. We can't "go back". We are a part of a changing world and we can't continue to claim preeminence.

It won't be long before China is the world powerhouse.  It is already predicted by many that China would win if it came to war. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

Opportunity missed.  Even Moderna's CEO sold a shit ton of shares. 

I bet they hedged their bets with options for the top guys if the gravy train continues much longer.  Boosters for a while seem a safe bet for maintenance, though, the big companies always find an angle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bag of Dicks said:

I bet they hedged their bets with options for the top guys if the gravy train continues much longer.  Boosters for a while seem a safe bet for maintenance, though, the big companies always find an angle.

That was the point of the thread.  They are pushing boosters, but they aren't being truthful about the efficacy.  I have a problem with that and for normal drug development, so would the FDA. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Wilbur said:

That was the point of the thread.  They are pushing boosters, but they aren't being truthful about the efficacy.  I have a problem with that and for normal drug development, so would the FDA. 

I thought you wrote they weren't writing about it in the story you read from the Daily Mail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, donkpow said:

I've been saying for years that the whole of American dominance, superiority, success, wealth, etc. is the direct result of a world decimated by war. The US can't hold that position without acknowledging that the other nations are currently regaining their status. We can't "go back". We are a part of a changing world and we can't continue to claim preeminence.

I have thought that for a while.  We were in such a logistically-enhanced location and couldn't effectively be attacked up until the nuclear age, attacking the US would be far too costly and and too time consuming to move enough pieces around to make it work. 

Being distant really worked, ask England about a few rock-throwers chasing them out of the country they legitimately stole from the rabble of indigenous folks.  Just shows how uninterrupted manufacturing of the tools of war is the key to victory.  China still has lots of neighbors, Russia being one and India, if it decides to really and truly ramp up, is another.  

There will be other wars as resource-grabs become more important down the road.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

That was the point of the thread.  They are pushing boosters, but they aren't being truthful about the efficacy.  I have a problem with that and for normal drug development, so would the FDA. 

True, variant-based boosters (when they arrive) seem likely to be much more effective, at least until the next strain comes out.  The same booster for delta and omicron is clearly not adding huge amounts of protection for omicron.  Covid is slippery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bag of Dicks said:

True, variant-based boosters (when they arrive) seem likely to be much more effective, at least until the next strain comes out.  The same booster for delta and omicron is clearly not adding huge amounts of protection for omicron.  Covid is slippery.

I won't be getting any.  I will take my chances with the virus, again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Wilbur said:

The article suggested the age group of 19-49 showed an insignificant efficacy of the booster.  I didn't write the article but when statistics are removed, one must question why. 

taking those numbers out, it showed a HUGE lifesaving benefit to those over 49.  Hospital data concurred.  Global date (not US only CDC) concurred.  Reporting without those numbers wasn't a good idea, but didn't change the fact that boosters saved lives.

The article "suggested".  Interesting, and article complaining about lack of data suggest a conclusion - without data.

Keep in mind, wee are trying to stay ahead of a constantly changing Novovirus.  Decisions are made quickly, some will be wrong.  But they will be wrong on the side of safety.  In this case, it seems to have turned out that we saved some 19-49 year old lives, just more than we thought managed to survive without the booster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bag of Dicks said:

The same booster for delta and omicron is clearly not adding huge amounts of protection for omicron.

actually, not true.  

The booster are showing great results in reducing severity and fatality.  Vaccines don't stop you from catching a virus, they stop the virus from making you sick and killing you.  Cases are up, but almost all deaths are un boosted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, 12string said:

actually, not true.  

The booster are showing great results in reducing severity and fatality.  Vaccines don't stop you from catching a virus, they stop the virus from making you sick and killing you.  Cases are up, but almost all deaths are un boosted.

Well, I did say 'huge', but I didn't clarify.  The gf got covid a second time (omicron, probably) even after having had severe covid previously AND being boosted.  She is a fair bit more immunocompromised than I am, though.  She said it sucked and she sounded like crap, but it started getting much better after 4 days and some change.  She still has problems catching wind, though, so even after having long covid after the first severe go-round, she has some more long-type symptoms after the second time.  No thanks.

I haven't gotten covid yet, maybe the booster helped some, and the initial vaccine seems to have helped, as have being among masked folks and not being in huge crowds.  You don't build a castle without putting in places to pour oil from, or shoot arrows or to trebuchet livestock on invaders.  You also put in a moat.  In other words, you take prudent steps to build concentric rings of protections, such that are available.  As I said, I will hedge my bets and boost up, seems way, WAY more convenient than getting covid and seeing if you draw the short straw.

I think the risk for severe covid goes down if you have had covid a couple of times before or severe covid once, so it is easier to be cavalier about it if you've already taken a bite.  Cheap (free) insurance from the most severe consequences seems the most reasonable course, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bag of Dicks said:

I haven't gotten covid yet

Would you necessarily even know?

For me, I haven't gotten sick from COVID, which doesn't mean I haven't been exposed, infected, or in some way reliant on my immune system to keep me from getting ill.  Considering my exposure - neither high nor low - it is certainly easy to imagine my vaccination and boostering has successfully beaten back COVID at least once.  

  • Awesome 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

A guy I know is taking his chances with COVID a third time.  He's smart like that.  Way more convenient than getting a booster.

I feel like shit for 4 months after vaxxes.  I will take my chances but then, that is my right isn't it.  I don't fuck with yours, you can stay clear of mine.  So, maybe your guy is smarter than you give him credit for.  Maybe he just doesn't buy the hype and fear mongering.  Maybe intentionally incomplete stats have that effect on reasoning?

  • Like 1
  • Hugs 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

Would you necessarily even know?

For me, I haven't gotten sick from COVID, which doesn't mean I haven't been exposed, infected, or in some way reliant on my immune system to keep me from getting ill.  Considering my exposure - neither high nor low - it is certainly easy to imagine my vaccination and boostering has successfully beaten back COVID at least once.  

That is an issue for sure.  I have been tested twice.  Once when the gf tested positive after the holidays, and I didn't get it after spending the entire holiday with her, smooching and such.  Once more after catching a little bug, turned out negative, too. 

I suppose I could have caught and been asymptomatic, but like you, it is easy for me to imagine that everything worked to battle it back.  Why take unnecessary risk, though, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

I feel like shit for 4 months after vaxxes.  I will take my chances but then, that is my right isn't it.  I don't fuck with yours, you can stay clear of mine.  So, maybe your guy is smarter than you give him credit for.  Maybe he just doesn't buy the hype and fear mongering.  Maybe intentionally incomplete stats have that effect on reasoning?

I thought you got vaxxed initially, did I remember that right? 

I previously had horrible reactions to flu vaccines, massive weeklong flu-like symptoms, so I stopped for a number of years.  Couldn't take the chance of bringing the flu home to my parents this year, so I got it late November and didn't get a reaction from that, or at least it seems that way because I got my booster at the same time.  Two days later I was completely over any side affects.  Maybe they have improved on the side affects for you too, who knows?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Prophet Zacharia said:

Someone will have to explain how the CDC is motivated by greed in altering it’s reporting on booster shot efficacy. Are they getting a kick-back from Pfizer and Moderna to keep promoting the vaccines? Surely these conspiracy theorists know that the CDC doesn’t actually make it sell the vaccines.

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bag of Dicks said:

I thought you got vaxxed initially, did I remember that right? 

I previously had horrible reactions to flu vaccines, massive weeklong flu-like symptoms, so I stopped for a number of years.  Couldn't take the chance of bringing the flu home to my parents this year, so I got it late November and didn't get a reaction from that, or at least it seems that way because I got my booster at the same time.  Two days later I was completely over any side affects.  Maybe they have improved on the side affects for you too, who knows?

I am fully vaxxed and tested more often than anyone should be.  That is the cost of doing my job.  My symptoms have gotten progressively worse with each vaccine, the last one caused arrhythmia, chest pain and inflammation.  I won't be getting another. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

I am fully vaxxed and tested more often than anyone should be.  That is the cost of doing my job.  My symptoms have gotten progressively worse with each vaccine, the last one caused arrhythmia, chest pain and inflammation.  I won't be getting another. 

Well, that just sucks.  I imagine you get tested whenever you land or take off, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bag of Dicks said:

Well, that just sucks.  I imagine you get tested whenever you land or take off, right?

Depends on the destination country.  My last trip to Paris, I was Covid tested, quarantined for the stay (3 days) and drug tested.  Oh what fun travel has become. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

Or maybe the CDC and FDA overlook some statistics to aid the sale because that is how they encouraged development.  Pharma companies aren't stupid. 

Sure, some employed there might own stock in the pharma companies, too.  Same way with any industry, insider information plays a part.  That said, there is no credible scientific community that says shots aren't effective and recommended against severe covid, and no credible dissent that vaccines are recommended for those that are able to tolerate them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Bag of Dicks said:

Sure, some employed there might own stock in the pharma companies, too.  Same way with any industry, insider information plays a part.  That said, there is no credible scientific community that says shots aren't effective and recommended against severe covid, and no credible dissent that vaccines are recommended for those that are able to tolerate them.

I don’t think this comment will stand the test of time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Bag of Dicks said:

Sure, some employed there might own stock in the pharma companies, too.  Same way with any industry, insider information plays a part.  That said, there is no credible scientific community that says shots aren't effective and recommended against severe covid, and no credible dissent that vaccines are recommended for those that are able to tolerate them.

157a72506feb013a97a6005056a9545d

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...