a Christian only topic of vaccine mandates

[probinson]

This is a bit higher than most surveys of larger groups show. But then a rather small sample, with people all in very close contact for an extended period, so maybe. But no journal would accept a report with a sample that small.

You must be unaware of the infamous hairdresser study that was shouted from the rooftops as proof of masking efficacy. Sample size? 139.
Absence of Apparent Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from Two Stylists...

If you think so, you don't know anything about viral infections.

Bottom line; Fully vaccinated people were infected. Nearly 40% of them.

Nor does it have a statistically valid sample size.

Neither did the hairdresser study that was referenced over and over (and over and over) again for masking efficacy.

Neither does the Pfizer data for 5-11 year olds. 1,500 total children got the vaccine in that study.

I'll ask again: how many of them had serious illness and were hospitalized?

There you go again, conflating efficacy against serious illness and hospitalization with efficacy against infection.

Last poll I saw showed the most people trust doctors and public health people far more then the anti-vaxxers

Intent to Get a COVID-19 Vaccine Rises to 60% as Confidence in Research and Development Process Increases
Still about two-in-ten ‘pretty certain’ they won’t get vaccine – even when there’s more information
Intent to Get a COVID-19 Vaccine Rises to 60% as Confidence in Research and Development Process Increases

That's the last poll you saw? This article is from December 2020, almost a year ago.

Whether you believe it or not, public health has a real public trust problem.

 

[The Barbarian]

If you mean that we should obey the government when they are acting as deacons of Christ, then yes.

Hmmm... I wonder how that would have worked for me...

"Col. Barr, I'd like to obey your command, but are you really acting as a deacon of Christ?"

I don't think it would have gone so well.

"Officer, I'd like to stay behind the police line you set up, but I'm not sure you're really acting as a deacon of Christ."

Not that one, either...

"Yes, Deputy Sheriff, I know the speed limit is 20 MPH in the school zone, but I don't think the people who passed that law were acting as deacons of Christ."

Probably not a good idea.

So let's see what the Bible says about that...

Romans 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

Only partially kidding here. Government is not God, nor does God want or need government to act on His behalf.

 

[probinson]

Show us that. Scientific journal articles. What do you have?

Moderna vaccines have been completely halted in those under 30 in Germany and France due to concerns over myocarditis. For those age 12-29, data from France shows a myocarditis rate of rate of 13.3 per 100,000, or roughly 1 in 7,500.

In the US this is how many have died from COVID according to the CDC in each age group;

1 in 74,687 12-15 year olds
1 in 39,795 16-17 year olds
1 in 11,884 18-29 year olds

In every age group, the rate of 1 in 7,500 myocarditis cases is a substantially higher risk.

But understanding this requires nuance and analysis of data, not the shortsighted GET VACCINATED! hysteria of the US public health officials.

 

[The Barbarian]

probinson said: ↑
How much virus exposure they had is irrelevant.

If you think so, you don't know anything about viral infections.

The risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection varies according to the amount of virus to which a person is exposed
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Bottom line; Fully vaccinated people were infected.

Bottom line, you are completely wrong about that. A first-year microbiology student would know better.

You were going to tell us how many of those infections resulted in serious illness or hospitalization. Is there a reason you can't tell us?

Nearly 40% of them.

But how many had serious illness or were hospitalized? None?

Neither does the Pfizer data for 5-11 year olds. 1,500 total children got the vaccine in that study.

Show us your numbers that demonstrate that was not a valid sample size. What do you have?

There you go again, conflating efficacy against serious illness and hospitalization with efficacy against infection.

Seems to me, preventing serious illness or death is a pretty effective thing. You seem to be conflating complete immunity to infection with protection from serious illness.

And you seem to have confused masking with vaccinations. They are different things, regardless of what you were told.

That's the last poll you saw?

Got a more recent poll? And yes, it seems now that about the same number of people think Trump won, as doubt the safety and effectiveness of COVID vaccines. But not because more people doubt the vaccines.

 

[probinson]

The big question; are vaccine mandates increasing vaccine uptake?

Well let's take a look. Every since Biden's angry grandpa, I'm losing my patience with you darn kids, motivational speech on September 9, the number of those fully vaccinated has increased from 53.38% to 57.62%. A paltry increase of less than 5%.

Who could have predicted that vaccine mandates would not have the intended effect? Well, the ACLU for one, which wrote in 2008 pandemic preparedness report (emphasis added);

American history contains vivid reminders that grafting the values of law enforcement and national security onto public health is both ineffective and dangerous. Too often, fears aroused by disease and epidemics have justified abuses of state power. Highly discriminatory and forcible vaccination and quarantine measures adopted in response to outbreaks of the plague and smallpox over the past century have consistently accelerated rather than slowed the spread of disease, while fomenting public distrust and, in some cases, riots.

The lessons from history should be kept in mind whenever we are told by government officials that “tough,” liberty-limiting actions are needed to protect us from dangerous diseases. Specifically:

• Coercion and brute force are rarely necessary. In fact they are generally counterproductive—they gratuitously breed public distrust and encourage the people who are most in need of care to evade public health authorities.

https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/privacy/pemic_report.pdf​

That vaccine uptake would not be increased by mandates and coercion was entirely predictable and expected.

If the government really wanted to increase vaccine uptake, they would do the following;

• Pass legislation that holds the vaccine manufacturers liable for any vaccine injuries resulting from COVID vaccines.
• Acknowledge natural immunity.
• Acknowledge age-stratification of COVID risk.

These three actions would increase vaccine uptake immensely. But don't hold your breath. They'd rather say things like "Breakthrough infections are rare!" while simultaneously disassociating themselves from any unvaccinated people so they... don't get infected. Try to wrap your cognitively dissonant mind around those two positions!

 

[probinson]

Bottom line, you are completely wrong about that.

No, anyone who doesn't deny reality can see that nearly 40% of the football team was infected with COVID despite being fully vaccinated. There's really no debate there. Just reality.

You were going to tell us how many of those infections resulted in serious illness or hospitalization. Is there a reason you can't tell us?

Because it's irrelevant no matter how much you keep repeating it. You seem incapable of not conflating efficacy of protection against infection with efficacy of protection against severe disease.

Show us your numbers that demonstrate that was not a valid sample size. What do you have?

Common sense?

If you give 1,500 kids a vaccine and there is an adverse event rate of 1 in 1,600, you could miss it in the study. That's why most vaccinations take years (5 or more) and have very large sample sizes before they are FDA approved. Not 1,500 kids over 3 months.

Seems to me, preventing serious illness or death is a pretty effective thing. You seem to be conflating complete immunity to infection with protection from serious illness.

No, I'm not. I've already said multiple times that the vaccines are effective against serious illness. They are FAR less effective at preventing infection. You keep spinning like crazy to obfuscate this point, but you're failing. Miserably.

And you seem to have confused masking with vaccinations.

Just pointing out the hypocrisy in you talking about sample sizes when most masking studies were 1) observational, 2) mechanistic and 3) underpowered.

Got a more recent poll?

Yes. 2 actually.

This one from May 2021;
Poll Finds Public Health Has A Trust Problem

And this one from June 2021;
Trust in CDC, FDA Took a Beating During Pandemic

 

[RDKirk]

If you mean that we should obey the government when they are acting as deacons of Christ, then yes.

Interestingly, Romans 13 does not qualify it.

I see what you're doing with "deacons," and I dismiss your intent to conflate concepts.

 

[Hammster]

Hmmm... I wonder how that would have worked for me...

"Col. Barr, I'd like to obey your command, but are you really acting as a deacon of Christ?"

I don't think it would have gone so well.

"Officer, I'd like to stay behind the police line you set up, but I'm not sure you're really acting as a deacon of Christ."

Not that one, either...

"Yes, Deputy Sheriff, I know the speed limit is 20 MPH in the school zone, but I don't think the people who passed that law were acting as deacons of Christ."

Probably not a good idea.

So let's see what the Bible says about that...

Romans 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

Only partially kidding here. Government is not God, nor does God want or need government to act on His behalf.

Wives are to submit to husbands. Should they obey everything that their husbands say? If your answer is no, then you should know that we don’t obey everything that the government says, either.


But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men.
— Acts 5:29

 

[Hammster]

Interestingly, Romans 13 does not qualify it.

I see what you're doing with "deacons," and I dismiss your intent to conflate concepts.

For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.
— Romans 13:3-4

No conflating.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Johns Hopkins, which initially reported a 1 in 5,000 breakthrough infection rate, now says that recent studies show it might be more like 1 in 100. Or perhaps it's more like 4 in 10, like we saw with the Cal football team. Who knows! Science can be so fickle...

Breakthrough Infections: Coronavirus After Vaccination

The conclusion that you draw from these facts, namely that vaccines are ineffective, just does not follow from these facts.

"Sufficiently high exposure". Got something a little less subjective than that?

It's not subjective. It is indefinite. For the purposes of my rebuttal, it is sufficient, for it proves there is a factor that is not taken into account in your analysis.

That's the way it should be, but THE SCIENCE™ has proven itself to be a fickle friend indeed.

Your use of the word "proven" in an anti-science rant is ironic.

Not an over the top accusation. It's quite accurate to say that the CDC and the FDA have a big public trust problem;

Poll Finds Public Health Has A Trust Problem

Trust in CDC, FDA Took a Beating During Pandemic

The public trust has taken a beating not because they deserve it, but because of the extremely active misinformation campaigns that have infected so much of the public that they stop trusting real science and instead trust these purveyors of lies.

 

[The Barbarian]

Wives are to submit to husbands. Should they obey everything that their husbands say? If your answer is no, then you should know that we don’t obey everything that the government says, either.


But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men.
— Acts 5:29

So Paul was wrong, after all? Or maybe injecting religion into politics is a really bad idea.

Something like that.

 

[The Barbarian]

Your use of the word "proven" in an anti-science rant is ironic.

Today's winner.

 

[Hammster]

So Paul was wrong, after all? Or maybe injecting religion into politics is a really bad idea.

Something like that.

Paul wasn’t wrong. Your interpretation is wrong.

 

[Job 33:6]

Johns Hopkins, which initially reported a 1 in 5,000 breakthrough infection rate, now says that recent studies show it might be more like 1 in 100. Or perhaps it's more like 4 in 10, like we saw with the Cal football team. Who knows! Science can be so fickle...

Breakthrough Infections: Coronavirus After Vaccination


"Sufficiently high exposure". Got something a little less subjective than that?



That's the way it should be, but THE SCIENCE™ has proven itself to be a fickle friend indeed.



Not an over the top accusation. It's quite accurate to say that the CDC and the FDA have a big public trust problem;

Poll Finds Public Health Has A Trust Problem

Trust in CDC, FDA Took a Beating During Pandemic

Do you find it strange that Delta variant is more transmissible than alpha? There's nothing abnormal about John's Hopkins statement, it's what every study has observed over the past year. And it's not science changing, rather the virus mutates.

 

[RDKirk]

Do you find it strange that Delta variant is more transmissible than alpha? There's nothing abnormal about John's Hopkins statement, it's what every study has observed over the past year. And it's not science changing, rather the virus mutates.

It's mutating in precisely the ways we'd expect "gain of function" to work.

 

[Job 33:6]

It's mutating in precisely the ways we'd expect "gain of function" to work.

Mutating by it's very nature, tends to gain function. We typically just refer to it as natural selection.

 

[Job 33:6]

Regarding vaccine efficacy, rather than relying on some random news article about a football team that had no control group or any associated study related to it, I'll offer the following:

Yet another blind study depicting significant efficacy of vaccination at preventing people from contracting the virus.

The study involved blindly testing a roughly equal number of vaccinated and unvaccinated patients of urgent care facilities and hospitals. Partially vaccinated we're excluded from the study. Of 7000 hospitalizations in vaccinated and 7000 unvaccinated, covid-19 was observed in 1316 of the unvaccinated group, and only 235 in the vaccinated group. Suggesting an 85% efficacy. 82% efficacy in preventing urgent care visits, 89% in the <75 age group and 76% in the older than 75 age group.

It's an apples to apples comparison, it's a blind study, all patients were tested and all subjects were admitted for comparable symptoms.

 

[JacksBratt]

Turns out, you're really, really wrong. So far, data show something like a ten times greater chance of dying from COVID-19 if you aren't vaccinated. Would you like me to show you, again?



... is in the greatly reduced number of vaccinated people getting infected and dying of the disease. Should I show you that data, again?

Getting COVID and dying from covid are two very different things.

Again, if the odds of dying or even getting very sick from COVID, after being vaccinated... is so low... Why are the vaccinated so concerned about the un vaccinated.


I knew this would happen... those who are vaccinated are protected but are militant about everyone getting the vax...

Who does it protect.. If I get vaccinated... it protects me. Why would I demand someone else to get the vax?

Especially if I, a vaccinated person, can get, carry and transmit the virus.

What danger does the un vaccinated have to those who are vaccinated.

 

[Job 33:6]

Here are a few more studies, including one that discusses natural immunity.

Again, vaccination is clearly demonstrated to prevent infection. @probinson

These studies involve testing of vaccinated and unvaccinated people for coronavirus, and then comparison how many people are vaccinated and have it vs how many are unvaccinated and have it. And again, populations of vaccinated people are significantly less likely to be infected. And this includes testing of asymptomatic people as well. By in large, the point is that vaccinated people are significantly less likely to have the virus, suggesting that vaccination is efficacious at stopping infection.

 

[The Barbarian]

Getting COVID and dying from covid are two very different things.

Yes. The vaccines are designed to keep you from serious illness and/or death. Which they do very effectively. Thank God.

Again, if the odds of dying or even getting very sick from COVID, after being vaccinated... is so low... Why are the vaccinated so concerned about the un vaccinated.

Several reasons. First, there is a small, but real possibility that they could still infect and kill a vaccinated person. Second, there are people who for legitimate medical reasons, cannot be vaccinated. Third, the ICUs often fill up with anti-vaxxers who fill beds needed by people with illnesses they didn't bring upon themselves.

But those people seem so entitled that they don't care who they hurt.