Covid-19 & discernible relationship between % of population fully vaccinated & new COVID-19 cases

Aldebaran said:

From the post I responded to:

Click to expand...

I don't see the word fear in there.

This is far different from how we were told it would be before the vaccines came along. We were told, "get the shot, return to normal". Now it's more like, "get the shot, continue being fearful, then fear those who make different decisions than you do, and hope the government becomes tyrannical so they can force people to do as you say/do".

Click to expand...

I have no idea who, if anyone, really said these quoted statements. Certainly no one you've quoted from this thread.

BrotherJJ said:

To be clear, I received 2 shots in April 2021. The article doesn't (nor do I ) claim the vaccine's don't provide (temporary) therapeutic value against the virus load.

What it (the science) does say is: Taking the mRNA vaccines do nothing against the spread of the covid-19 virus.

""Pfizer director Rochelle Walensky"" said we see that the vaccinated can contract the infection symptomatically.

Click to expand...

But again, you're making a leap that's not there.

Saying that protection against symptomatic protection wanes and suggesting that vaccinated people can still spread it doesn't = "does nothing against the spread"

It may not "stop the spread", but it does "reduce the spread"

This study:
Vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 transmission to household contacts during dominance of Delta variant (B.1.617.2), August-September 2021, the Netherlands

...found that vaccination reduced risk of spreading to other household members by 40%, and reduced risk of spreading to non-household members by 63%.

You even stated in your post, therapeutic value against virus load... vaccinated people also clear the virus faster than unvaccinated.

Lower viral load + swifter clearing of the virus = less likely to transmit in the context of human behavior and interaction.

You're carrying less of it, and you're carrying it for a shorter amount of time.

Who's more likely to spread it (and to more people)? The guy who's carrying the virus around for 10 days, in high viral loads, or the guy who has a lower viral load and clears it in 5 days?

Or a simple mathematical way to address it.

If I encounter 20 people a day, and carry the virus for 10 days, that's 200 potential people I could infect. If clear the virus after 5 days, that's only 100 people I could infect...the 100 people I would've encountered on days 6-10 have been spared having to be around me while infectious.

BrotherJJ said:

Horowitz: Harvard researcher finds absolutely no correlation between vax rates and COVID cases globally

Click to expand...

I'd be interested in taking a look at the particular research you're talking about.

I've seen similar claims before, and in each case, they've failed to control for lifestyle differences across nations.

For example, several African nations (despite having fewer mitigation measures in place) can boast lower covid numbers despite having very low vaccination rates. However, in many of those countries, people spend a lot more time outdoors rather than indoors. (which we know indoor transmission risks are higher)

The other studies I've seen making those claims have failed to control for comorbidities as well. (IE: a 350lbs smoker, even if vaccinated, is still at a higher risk of symptomatic covid infection than a lean healthy person under 30 who's not vaccinated)

Aldebaran said:

So? Do you not understand that fear can be indicated without actually saying the word?

Click to expand...

Hey look, an attempt to make this about me.

Aldebaran said:

More about your understanding than about you.

Click to expand...

Yep, to elaborate - an attempt to pretend this is about my understanding rather than the fact that the post I initially responded to was a fabrication. Maybe some people will fall for it, who knows? Beats having to admit being caught diverting from what posts in the thread actually said.

Aldebaran said:

Define "this".

Click to expand...

Definition of this | Dictionary.com

I can't wait to see what the next attempted distraction is.

Aldebaran said:

From the post I responded to:


This is far different from how we were told it would be before the vaccines came along. We were told, "get the shot, return to normal". Now it's more like, "get the shot, continue being fearful, then fear those who make different decisions than you do, and hope the government becomes tyrannical so they can force people to do as you say/do".

Click to expand...

Right. That didn't age well, did it?

Aldebaran said:

It did if it causes people to feel so hopeless that they increase their reliance on the same govt. that promised to solve everything. Much like the battered wife who feels she can't leave her abuser.

Click to expand...

Hard to believe that so many cannot see this trajectory yet, but they can't. Flummoxing.

Aldebaran said:

You're doing quite well at providing those on your own.

Click to expand...

I can tell I've made a point when this sort of thing is the best that can be dredged up in response.

BrotherJJ said:

CDC study shows 74% of people infected in Massachusetts Covid outbreak were fully vaccinated (cnbc.com)

Click to expand...

Actually, I think this outcome makes a pretty strong case for the vaccines.

That particular area was "party central" (lots of people congregating in bars and restaurants).

It's also a highly vaccinated area.

So, thousands of people (most of whom were vaccinated) descend on an area for a party weekend (lots of drinking, dancing, indoor socializing with strangers)

469 cases total (75% were vaccinated)

Among that vaccinated group:
1/3 were asymptomatic
Only 4 hospitalizations
No deaths were reported among that vaccinated group after those events

Seems like the vaccines held up pretty well being that those events were quite a "stress test"

Sort of like testing out your newly designed seatbelt at the Indy 500.

BrotherJJ said:

CDC study shows 74% of people infected in Massachusetts Covid outbreak were fully vaccinated (cnbc.com)

Click to expand...

Thanks, but I'm familiar with the outbreak. The final, detailed description of it just appeared in Cell; you can find it here. (Note that I'm one of the lead authors.) It does nothing to change the conclusion that vaccines were moderately good at preventing transmission (at least prior to Omicron) and are very good at preventing severe disease.

BrotherJJ said:

I was replying to your comment made to me in post #2. Where 2 claimed it was just one article.

Click to expand...

I know. And now you've linked to an article that does not support your original claim -- it does not conclude that vaccines do nothing to prevent transmission. Which still leaves you with one article.