Massachusettes sees at least 80 deaths from Covid among the vaccinated

Ponderous Curmudgeon

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2021
1,477
944
65
Newfield
✟38,862.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
It actually matters. Different platforms generate different immune outcomes.
I'll grant you that, but to a first order, what we are looking for is a response. Which is most useful in the future is another question.
 
Upvote 0

Ponderous Curmudgeon

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2021
1,477
944
65
Newfield
✟38,862.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
That is how immune dysregulation works.
Instead of being a "weakened" immune system, it is an irregular one.
When a vaccine is cultivated in a particular cell base, fragments of those cells make it into the vaccine. Most people's immune systems dispatch both types of fragments with no problem.

Ours works fine for A-list vaccines, but not B-list. That issue is still being researched, but it has only contraindicated two routine vaccines, so far. That there are A-list covid vaccines (and the prevailing pseudo-vaccines haven't been cleared for us) means we can wait for a little bit.
To that extent, it seems the mRNA vaccines should be all that much better in that they are not cellular byproducts. otherwise, I am not arguing with you.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Sabertooth
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

Rocket surgeon
Mar 11, 2017
14,975
11,963
54
USA
✟300,344.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Absolutely!
The Covid vaccines are (were) claimed to be 95% effective, and yet we're still seeing hospitalizations and deaths that give it an actual effectiveness closer to 34%

As for the Smallpox vaccine, according to the CDC:
"Historically, the vaccine has been effective in preventing smallpox infection in 95% of those vaccinated. In addition, the vaccine was proven to prevent or substantially lessen infection when given within a few days after a person was exposed to the variola virus."
Vaccine Basics | Smallpox | CDC

That's right. 95%.

So I ask again, how many people vaccinated against Smallpox have died from Smallpox this year?

When I first replied to your first "smallpox" post, I had hope that your post wasn't disingenuous. Alas, that hope was unjustified.

I want everyone to understand how disingenuous that posting was.

There were no deaths from smallpox this decade from smallpox inoculated individuals, because *NO ONE* got smallpox because the disease isn't circulating. On the other hand, SARS-CoV-2 is circulating, not just a little, but quite a bit. Since *NO* vaccine stops *ALL* infections, any disease that can cause death can result in deaths in vaccinated individuals. Others have posted appropriate data.

This is equivalent to complaining that airbags aren't effective because some people in car crashes die after interacting with an airbag (i.e., it doesn't prevent their deaths) in contrasts to Space Shuttles, which haven't killed anyone in the last 10 years when no one has even traveled by Space Shuttle in the last 10 years.

I cannot find your postings and motivations to be credibly motivated on this topic.
 
Upvote 0

Sabertooth

Repartee Animal: Quipping the Saints!
Site Supporter
Jul 25, 2005
10,509
7,068
62
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟961,095.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I have never heard of this A-list/B-list thing, and can find no reference to it in any google search, have you a link?
A-list/B-list is a reference to our own immune dysfunction; similar to allergies. For other people, it could be different which base is on A-list or B-list.

Our A-list:
  • Bifidobacterium
  • Cendehill
  • CHO
  • E-coli
  • Egg
  • Hamster
  • Immunoglobulin
  • insect
  • MDCK
  • plant
  • Rabbit
  • Vero
  • Yeast
Our B-list:
  • HEK-293
  • MRC-5
  • PER-C6
  • RA 27/3
  • WI-38
Two of my children had a bad reaction to WI-38 and the rest on that list are close enough to warrant caution. Everything from the A-list has been well-tolerated so far.

Valneva & Sinovac both use vero cells.
AZ uses HEK-293 & MRC-5.
J&J uses PER-C6.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: Tanj
Upvote 0

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Aug 3, 2012
25,291
24,200
Baltimore
✟557,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
If you're going to get angsty about the math, you might try to use correct math to prove your point. The mathematical model you are using doesn't account for how long the respective populations have been exposed to Covid, and it double counts the vaccinated deaths in the unvaccinated deaths calculation.

The 4,307,361 population that has been vaccinated is only as of July 20. Assuming vaccination began in late January (with no one being fully vaccinated until late February), and vaccination occurred at an even rate the average number of people vaccinated in Massachusetts since the vaccination program began, from the period of March 2021 through July 2021, there are would be 2,153,681. 2,153,681 people for 6 months is 12,922,083 person-months. Assuming the 80 vaccinated are the only ones dead, it would be 1 dead for every 161,526 person-months of people in Massachusetts.

For the unvaccinated, there are 12 months of a fully unvaccinated population (~7.1 million people), plus 6 months (March-July) of an average of 4,946,320 unvaccinated people. That amounts to 114,877,917 person-months for the unvaccinated. You would need to subtract out the 80 vaccinated who died (you counted them twice, once for the vaccinated death count and once in the unvaccinated death count), so you have 18,041 unvaccinated deaths in 114,877,917 person-months for the unvaccinated, or 1 dead for every 6367 person-months of people in Massachusetts.

Assuming the actual numbers of vaccinated deaths and vaccination rate are correct, it's 25x difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated, not 145x difference.

This particular data set still looks good for the vaccine effectiveness (assuming all of the numbers reported are correct), but you're off by a factor of 6.

Of course, the way Covid deaths are counted would have to remain constant for that to be true, and, of course, in light of the vaccine roll-out, they needed to change how deaths are counted:

The Department of Public Health changed how it counts COVID-19 deaths in Massachusetts long-term care facilities on Thursday, aligning with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control's national definition — and in the process, cutting the state's cumulative long-term care death toll by 1,220.

In Thursday's weekly report, DPH started using the federal standard for long-term care deaths, which counts all residents of a facility who died from COVID complications in a facility, hospital or other location, but does not count those who recovered from COVID-19 and later died.
...
Up to this point, Massachusetts had counted all long-term care residents who contracted the virus at some point before they died — even those who recovered between their bout with the illness and their death — as COVID-19 long-term care deaths. The new standard mirrors the CDC's recommendation and that in place in most other states, according to the Baker administration.

"By aligning the long-term death count on the state's weekly dashboard with federal definitions for long-term care facilities, Massachusetts is aligning with the definition that other states use," DPH State Epidemiologist Catherine Brown said in a statement. "DPH also believes this definition better supports long-term care facilities now that so many residents and staff are vaccinated to closely monitor the effect of COVID in a well-vaccinated but vulnerable population."

As a result of the change, the cumulative long-term care death toll in Massachusetts will be listed at 5,502 as of April 12, compared to the 6,722 reported as of April 5 in the final weekly report under the previous state standards. The update does not appear to change the overall cumulative COVID-19 death toll in Massachusetts, which increased from 17,427 in Wednesday's daily report to 17,432 in Thursday's.


DPH Changes Counting Method For Long-Term Care Deaths | WBUR News

They changed the way deaths were counted, they dropped the number of reported deaths in April, but they left the overall death count intact, meaning they were overcounting deaths in 2020 vs how they're counting them since April 2021. Based on the April data change, it appears that as many as 20% of the deaths counted through April 2021 wouldn't be counted in today's metrics.

It would really be 14,766 deaths against 114,877,917 person-months yielding a death for every 7,779 person-months. Or 20x better to be vaccinated than unvaccinated. Still better, but a far cry from the 145x you were claiming.

Don't worry, i won't count the rule change in how Massachusetts counts their deaths against you for your math. Who would've thunk that Massachusetts would change the rules as to how they count their Covid deaths?

I actually did subtract out the 80 deaths from the unvaccinated numbers when I did my calculations, though I didn’t articulate that explicitly in my earlier post. It amounted to little more than a rounding error.

I’m not sure the person-months comparison is a proper one, but either way, as you note, having the vaccine is still wildly safer and more effective against covid than not having the vaccine.
 
Upvote 0

Aldebaran

NCC-1701-A
Christian Forums Staff
Purple Team - Moderator
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2009
38,740
12,122
Wisconsin, United States of America
✟652,419.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
It did work over time because people participated in the program. No vaccine is 100% effective. The point is to lower your odds of catching and transmitting it.

It worked in that it eradicated the virus. The virus didn't spawn a "variant" a few months after a vaccine was created.
 
Upvote 0

Aldebaran

NCC-1701-A
Christian Forums Staff
Purple Team - Moderator
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2009
38,740
12,122
Wisconsin, United States of America
✟652,419.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
So no actual data, just a reference to an example of a historically successful vaccine that took far longer to develop than the current vaccine. Your point?

Did you miss the link? Yeah, your data is right there.
 
Upvote 0

Aldebaran

NCC-1701-A
Christian Forums Staff
Purple Team - Moderator
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2009
38,740
12,122
Wisconsin, United States of America
✟652,419.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
We weren't given any information indicating that anyone had died from the vaccination itself.

Don't expect the current regime in power to be transparent with that information any time soon.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: anna ~ grace
Upvote 0

Aldebaran

NCC-1701-A
Christian Forums Staff
Purple Team - Moderator
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2009
38,740
12,122
Wisconsin, United States of America
✟652,419.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Aldebaran

NCC-1701-A
Christian Forums Staff
Purple Team - Moderator
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2009
38,740
12,122
Wisconsin, United States of America
✟652,419.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
When I first replied to your first "smallpox" post, I had hope that your post wasn't disingenuous. Alas, that hope was unjustified.

I want everyone to understand how disingenuous that posting was.

There were no deaths from smallpox this decade from smallpox inoculated individuals, because *NO ONE* got smallpox because the disease isn't circulating. On the other hand, SARS-CoV-2 is circulating, not just a little, but quite a bit. Since *NO* vaccine stops *ALL* infections, any disease that can cause death can result in deaths in vaccinated individuals. Others have posted appropriate data.

This is equivalent to complaining that airbags aren't effective because some people in car crashes die after interacting with an airbag (i.e., it doesn't prevent their deaths) in contrasts to Space Shuttles, which haven't killed anyone in the last 10 years when no one has even traveled by Space Shuttle in the last 10 years.

I cannot find your postings and motivations to be credibly motivated on this topic.

Likewise.

Anywho, Smallpox was a virus that was 100% wiped out by a vaccine. Therefore, no deaths are reported because the vaccine actually was 100%, despite your claims that no vaccine stops all infections.
 
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

Rocket surgeon
Mar 11, 2017
14,975
11,963
54
USA
✟300,344.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Likewise.

Anywho, Smallpox was a virus that was 100% wiped out by a vaccine. Therefore, no deaths are reported because the vaccine actually was 100%, despite your claims that no vaccine stops all infections.

Your own link showed that the smallpox vaccine was 95% effective, not 100%. It doesn't need to be 100% effective to stop the virus completely dead, it just needs (combined with population coverage) to reduce the reproduction rate below 1, so that the typical patient passes it to less than 1 additional person and it eventually dies out.
 
Upvote 0

Aldebaran

NCC-1701-A
Christian Forums Staff
Purple Team - Moderator
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2009
38,740
12,122
Wisconsin, United States of America
✟652,419.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Your own link showed that the smallpox vaccine was 95% effective, not 100%. It doesn't need to be 100% effective to stop the virus completely dead, it just needs (combined with population coverage) to reduce the reproduction rate below 1, so that the typical patient passes it to less than 1 additional person and it eventually dies out.

Yes, 95%, just as I pointed out in post #39, and same as the Covid vaccine supposedly is. And even when people take it, they still get sick and they still die, just as I pointed out in post #1. I also pointed out in another thread that even when you reach the number of vaccinated to provide "herd immunity", the effect of the "vaccine" is so small that lockdowns are back on the table: Israel sees outbreak of Covid--mostly among vaccinated
 
Upvote 0

Pommer

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic
Sep 13, 2008
16,603
10,429
Earth
✟142,597.00
Country
United States
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
Why does how long something takes to develop matter?
The pace that these amazing people brought a tested product to market was absolutely phenomenal.

I think I call them “amazing” because if people were going to have to rely on me to have gotten this done, yeah, 2036, (for sure!)

I’m sure that a good many, good, honest, hard-working people would concede that if this sort of high-pressure cutting-edge sciencey work was entrusted to their own “work-team” it’d be years’ longer than what it took these big pharma whizzes to do.

Our honest people though cannot conceive that anybody could do any better than they themselves and they won’t “trust it” because it was “all too fast!”

These kids and their cobbling together a vaccine from parts rather than having to grow QUANTITIES of SARS-CoV-2 to create vaccines the good old-fashioned way!
True, it’s a time tested, recipe for vaccines.
This new way may be fraught with hidden dangers!

Why do we shrug and accept that 120 years ago the only way sound was recorded was on wax cylinders and now there’s a myriad of methods to do so…but cannot fathom a “two month” vaccine (development to Phase I testing)?

This is why “conservative-thought” needs to stay out of science.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hans Blaster
Upvote 0

Pommer

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic
Sep 13, 2008
16,603
10,429
Earth
✟142,597.00
Country
United States
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
That is how immune dysregulation works.
Instead of being a "weakened" immune system, it is an irregular one.
When a vaccine is cultivated in a particular cell base, fragments of those cells make it into the vaccine. Most people's immune systems dispatch both types of fragments with no problem.

Ours works fine for A-list vaccines, but not B-list. That issue is still being researched, but it has only contraindicated two routine vaccines, so far. That there are A-list covid vaccines (and the prevailing pseudo-vaccines haven't been cleared for us) means we can wait for a little bit.
While I vehemently disagree with you on this, I do concede that it is a valid point-of-view and could even see me holding it on this very subject, but not this time, some generation has to be the “first generation” to use “synthesized vaccines”, are you suggesting that our people are not brave enough to suffer whatever “mistakes” might be made this time around?

My parents’ generation gave up meat to “help*” make sure that we’d win WWII.

*I’m sure that the Roosevelt Administration could’ve forced meat producers to increase Production to meet the needs of ourselves and our armies, but it was easier if we just all pitched in ate ate canned cream chipped-beef more other!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

variant

Happy Cat
Jun 14, 2005
23,636
6,398
✟295,051.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Don't expect the current regime in power to be transparent with that information any time soon.

What I would expect is that the number would be so low as to be inconsequential.

If you want to make sure you live in some sort of irrational paralyzed fear of vaccines though, I bet you can find plenty of antidotal evidence to support it.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: Belk
Upvote 0

variant

Happy Cat
Jun 14, 2005
23,636
6,398
✟295,051.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
The pace that these amazing people brought a tested product to market was absolutely phenomenal.

I think I call them “amazing” because if people were going to have to rely on me to have gotten this done, yeah, 2036, (for sure!)

I’m sure that a good many, good, honest, hard-working people would concede that if this sort of high-pressure cutting-edge sciencey work was entrusted to their own “work-team” it’d be years’ longer than what it took these big pharma whizzes to do.

Our honest people though cannot conceive that anybody could do any better than they themselves and they won’t “trust it” because it was “all too fast!”

These kids and their cobbling together a vaccine from parts rather then having to grow QUANTITIES of SARS-CoV-2 to create vaccines the good old-fashioned way!
True, it’s a time tested, recipe for vaccines.
This new way may be fraught with hidden dangers!

Why do we shrug and accept that 120 years ago the only way sound was recorded was on wax cylinders and now there’s a myriad of methods to do so…but cannot fathom a “two month” vaccine (development to Phase I testing)?

This is why “conservative-thought” needs to stay out of science.

While impressive how fast they did it, this is just a example of innovation being motivated by necessity.

The development would have happened anyway, as the vaccine developers were already set up to do this as their "next step" in vaccine development. It is no coincidence that when the question was asked "how fast can you get a vaccine" that vaccine developers would have a solution in mind that they simply hadn't tried yet.

We've been trying to deal with the flu for the last 100 or so years and how one needs to make a new vaccine every year to deal with how it changes. So it seems like a natural idea that someone would be developing faster ways to make vaccines.

All of the science involved was already known back when I was in college in the 2000's so it's not like the development all happened instantaneously.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Pommer

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic
Sep 13, 2008
16,603
10,429
Earth
✟142,597.00
Country
United States
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
While impressive how fast they did it, this is just a example of innovation being motivated by necessity.

The development would have happened anyway, as the vaccine developers were already set up to do this as their "next step" in vaccine development. It is no coincidence that when the question was asked "how fast can you get a vaccine" that vaccine developers would have a solution in mind that they simply hadn't tried yet.

We've been trying to deal with the flu for the last 100 or so years and how one needs to make a new vaccine every year to deal with how it changes. So it seems like a natural idea that someone would be developing faster ways to make vaccines.

All of the science involved was already known back when I was in college in the 2000's so it's not like the development all happened instantaneously.
Or automobiles…8 gallons to a mile is hyperbole but, yeah, science just exploded on the last 300 years and has had some hits and some misses.

Our friends are scared that this is going to be a miss. I’m a bit more optimistic.
 
Upvote 0