12 Covid infected. All 12 vaccinated, and most had boosters.

Rachel20

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2020
1,954
1,443
STX
✟58,109.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
What?? How the heck does the adaptive immune system weaken innate immunity? Connect the dots on that one for me. Is it the antigen presenting cells get expliramused by this magic effect, the invariant gamma-delta Tcells, NKs?

You can find discussions here:
Geert Vanden Bossche - Voice for Science & Solidarity

And here:
Covid-19 and Vaccination FAQ | Voice for Science and Solidarity

But in a nutshell, if vaccine-induced Abs bind to the virus faster than natural Abs ("outcompeting" natural Abs) but don't neutralize them, yet block the natural immunity Abs from binding and neutralizing, then you have a problem. Blocking the innate immunity capabilities is what's meant by "weakening" it here.
 
Upvote 0

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd
Supporter
Sep 4, 2005
24,643
14,530
Here
✟1,196,492.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
You were using the starting numbers yourself to show the increase. I just looked at the same data in terms of rate of increase, which I don't think is "statistically invalid". If you plot those lines on a graph, it's obvious the vaccinated deaths will overtake the unvaccinated at some point. But which of us is correct won't be apparent in a single snapshot, we need more time for the real picture to emerge.

Yes, I referenced the starting numbers as of May 1st (because that's when we hit the 50% vaccinated mark) as a baseline - simply because it's easier to compare the two groups once they're of a similar size for simplicity's sake.

If you want to see a more granular version (and how it's not following the wild pattern you were suggesting)

The original starting point I established:
354921_8c05d5915f3f9b5f5eb2734e43925389.png



Here's some other stops along the way

Mid September (after the Delta variant had taken hold)
354922_b576e70ca1912cbc168ebc5baca180e4.png


Mid-October
upload_2021-12-5_17-58-57.png


2 weeks before Thanksgiving
upload_2021-12-5_17-56-55.png


And the Dec 1st numbers in my previous post:
356754_152d3c0adfcf2d002fa0167114f7ef8b.png



As you can see, even amid the Delta variant (which was way more transmissible, which is why both groups began to see an uptick that was sharper than the uptick previously starting at the September milestone), the vaccinated group is still only increasing in deaths by about 100-150 per month, and that pattern hasn't really altered throughout Delta, as to where during each of those gaps, the unvaccinated deaths increased by a much larger amount during each of those steps.

And the data where they harvest from comes from the CDC Breakthrough project, and they echo a similar pattern on a national level with regards to the hospitalization patterns as well:

upload_2021-12-5_18-9-8.png



In essence, there was a sharper uptick when Delta took hold, but that uptick didn't follow some sort of exponential pattern to infinity. It had an increase in September, and has been the following the "100-150 vaccinated death every month or so" ever since then. Same with the hospitalizations, there was a slight jump from late July to Late August (as the end of summa delta surge ramped up), and from then till now, the line has been pretty flat.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Tanj

Redefined comfortable middle class
Mar 31, 2017
7,682
8,316
59
Australia
✟277,286.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
You can find discussions here:
Geert Vanden Bossche - Voice for Science & Solidarity

And here:
Covid-19 and Vaccination FAQ | Voice for Science and Solidarity

But in a nutshell, if vaccine-induced Abs bind to the virus faster than natural Abs ("outcompeting" natural Abs) but don't neutralize them, yet block the natural immunity Abs from binding and neutralizing, then you have a problem. Blocking the innate immunity capabilities is what's meant by "weakening" it here.

Your first link says I should follow some nutter on telegram
Your second links to a massive list of stuff none of which says anything about the adaptive immune system weakening the innate.

So, once again, can you link to any actual evidence? By what mechanism is any aspect of the adaptive immune system weakening the innate?

By what mechanism does a high affinity non neutralising Ab block a neutralising one, how do you think the immune system is able to differentiate the source of a high affinity Ab, and what the heck does any of that have to do with the innate immune system?

This is pure hookum. Someone, probably this Geert guy, is tossing up jargon word salad to prey on your fear, gullibility, and lack of biomedical knowledge. It's complete rubbish.
 
Upvote 0

Rachel20

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2020
1,954
1,443
STX
✟58,109.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Your first link says I should follow some nutter on telegram ... It's complete rubbish.

I mistook you for someone who was asking an honest question. Can't believe after that hateful mouthful you would actually ask another.

btw GVB, the "nutter", is a world renowned virologist
 
Upvote 0

Tanj

Redefined comfortable middle class
Mar 31, 2017
7,682
8,316
59
Australia
✟277,286.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I mistook you for someone who was asking an honest question. Can't believe after that hateful mouthful you would actually ask another.

You are relinking complete nonsense. That's not hateful, it's factual. And you still haven't answered the question. There is no mechanism by which the adaptive immune response can weaken the innate.
 
Upvote 0

Rachel20

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2020
1,954
1,443
STX
✟58,109.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Yes, I referenced the starting numbers as of May 1st (because that's when we hit the 50% vaccinated mark) as a baseline - simply because it's easier to compare the two groups once they're of a similar size for simplicity's sake.
...
If you want to see a more granular version (and how it's not following the wild pattern you were suggesting)

Thanks, the intermediate points are interesting. But the average rate-of-change over the 7-mo period would still be calculated using the two endpoints, just as your amount-of-change calc would. Do appreciate the data though and I like that the two groups are about equal in size. We'll eventually lose the control group as more get vaxed and that's concerning.
 
Upvote 0

Aldebaran

NCC-1701-A
Christian Forums Staff
Purple Team - Moderator
Supporter
Oct 17, 2009
38,654
12,107
Wisconsin, United States of America
✟622,977.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
This is an excellent example of cherry-picking. It should be used as the descriptive example of cherry-picking in the Wikipedia article on the meaning of the term.

The reason this example is so spot on is that it cites an extremely small sample - people in the wedding party who came from California to Wisconsin. It is likely that people in the party from California hung out together during the visit and spread covid within their subgroup, rather than catch it from others at the wedding. So how many unvaccinated people were there in that California group? It is possible they were all vaccinated? If so, it would be impossible for anyone testing positive to be unvaccinated. This statistic says more about the high rates of vaccination in this subgroup than it does about the relative benefits of being vaccinated. As it says in the fine print on ads, "your results may vary."

No cherry picking. Just the fact that the 12 people who were infected were ALL vaccinated, and most even had boosters but still got infected. Take from it what you will.
 
Upvote 0

ThatRobGuy

Part of the IT crowd
Supporter
Sep 4, 2005
24,643
14,530
Here
✟1,196,492.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Thanks, the intermediate points are interesting. But the average rate-of-change over the 7-mo period would still be calculated using the two endpoints, just as your amount-of-change calc would. Do appreciate the data though and I like that the two groups are about equal in size. We'll eventually lose the control group as more get vaxed and that's concerning.

The two endpoints are only applicable if all other conditions remain static, and if the starting point was "we vaccinate 50% of the population in 1 day, and then let it ride, and everything else remains static". But that's the not the case.

You had a combination of factors (like the immergence of Delta, and states relaxing policies) happening in the middle of that time window.

There's a difference between a one-time factor and a factor that has an exponential effect. The immergence of Delta, and policy relaxation aren't exponential factors.

As an analogy to clarify the mathematical pattern, think of it as your boss assigning you an additional task at work.

Let's say, under normal conditions, your work day was 8 hours. Your boss calls you on Monday night and assigns you an additional task starting Tuesday that takes an hour, so your work day goes from 8 to 9 hours.

So from Monday to Tuesday, your work day increased by 12 percent...

So, does that mean that the rest of your work week is going to look like:
Monday: 8 hours
Tuesday: 9 hours
Wednesday: 10.1 hours
Thursday: 11.2 hours
Friday: 12.5 hours
??

Or is it going to be:
Monday: 8 hours
Tuesday: 9 hours
Wednesday: 9 hours
Thursday: 9 hours
Friday: 9 hours
??


The correct answer of course, is the latter, because that additional one hour task (let's call it the "Delta Assignment") was introduced into your workload (case load), but that factor doesn't have an exponential impact on your schedule. That additional 1-hour task will still take you 1 hour on Wednesday, just like it did on Tuesday.


That's basically what we're seeing with this.
Pre-delta, we were seeing an increase of 20-30 breakthrough deaths a month
Amid-delta, we were seeing an increase of 100-150 breakthrough deaths a month

If it followed your progression pattern:
Since it went from 97 (which is what it was in the last breakthrough update before delta) to 205, that's a doubling.

Which means that if it was following your pattern
Mid-October would've gone up by 410 breakthrough deaths (it only went up 160)
Mid-November would've gone up 820 (it only went up 120)
Mid December would go up by 1640 (it's only up 104 at the moment, with only a few days left till we hit mid-Dec)

So among the vaccinated vs unvaccinated over the past 3 months, the deaths went up by

160/120/104
vs.
977/481/1,719

The former is looking a lot better than the latter.
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
Reactions: KCfromNC
Upvote 0

KCfromNC

Regular Member
Apr 18, 2007
28,632
15,950
✟484,206.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Post #14 is just showing what the numbers in post #3 indicate, in terms of rates.

It is interesting how when the post's attempt at analysis leads to nonsensical results, we get complaints that others take it seriously. And then here, an attempt to un-backtrack to again pretend that the post is again reasonable.

So Post #3 looks only at "vaxed" vs "unvaxed". Neither of these categories tell us anything about prior infections (symptomatic or not) in those groups. This is important because any prior infection would indicate some innate immunity priming had occurred (in both groups) before 5/1 (a reasonable assumption because the virus was around more than 1 year before vaccines were available). This means that the vaccine may not be the only thing at play in the "vaxed" numbers! Those with immunity priming have 2 benefits: vax-induced Abs and natural immunity Abs. So if the "vaxed" numbers are better (at the moment), which group of Abs do we attribute that to? Or in what ratio? Since we can't answer this question, we can't interpret the better numbers for the "vaxed" group as being strictly due to the vaccines.
That's a lot of maybes to try to hand-wave away a 10x or more difference in hospitalization and death rates.
 
Upvote 0