Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Vaccinated are 13 times more likely to get covid than those with naturally acquired immunity
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="rambot" data-source="post: 76204465" data-attributes="member: 145797"><p>Yes. And "adverse affects" of the vaccine are also very rare.</p><p></p><p>While you used the word, you QUOTED (well, posted a pic and circled it). The word "rare" was used by a third party. I'm not too bothered by how you use the word rare because you have not been using it incorrectly; I'm more hoping the consistency that the CDC has used the word would be evident.</p><p></p><p>It has not been "proven to be quite elastic" at all. To believe that the CDC would be "elastic" in their use of a word like that should show the reader that you are not understanding the full context.</p><p></p><p>For example:</p><p>Deaths LINKED to the COVID vaccine in the US are 3.</p><p>Yes. That's 3. </p><p>And to remind you: Those 3 blood clots were from the J&J vaccine (or was it Astrozeneca?) and you'll recall that the dispensation of those vaccines temporarily or altogether stopped. THAT'S how sensitive the threshold is.</p><p></p><p>Deaths linked to people who have RECEIVED the vaccine: 6300 or so; but no analyzed link.</p><p></p><p>6300, alone, sounds worrisome. But then you can remember that over 339 million DOSES have been put into arms suddenly that number should be laughably small (.00018%)</p><p></p><p>So let's compare:</p><p>339,000,000 ---> 6300</p><p>That is CRAZY rare; like, that fits the definition of of "rare" because, of the possible out comes, it is a very infrequent outcome.</p><p></p><p>At the same time, the COVID reticent indicated back in 2020 that "almost nobody under 60 EVER dies from this disease because it's just the flu".</p><p>Quick and dirty math shows that ABOUT 175,000 people age 64 and under died.</p><p><a href="https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Deaths-by-Sex-and-Age/9bhg-hcku" target="_blank">https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Deaths-by-Sex-and-Age/9bhg-hcku</a></p><p></p><p>I'm, sadly, too lazy to get the number of people under age 65 who have been infected with COVID but the TOTAL so far is 40million. To (imperfectly) compare, this will give you a LOWER (MORE rare) outcome but....</p><p>That works out to about 0.4% of the population under 65 who contracted COVID.</p><p></p><p>If you were to compare 0.4% and 0.00018%, a person should recognize thatsuggesting the relative incidents of both of these percentages are both "comparable" and both "rare", is really imprecise at best, but mostly just illogical. I mean, it's 2000x different.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The application of the word (or really concept) "rare" has shown to be terrifyingly inconsistent to folks who "haven't bought the COVID narrative". I wonder if there's a correlation in misunderstanding/misapplication of terms and reluctance to believe the science.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="rambot, post: 76204465, member: 145797"] Yes. And "adverse affects" of the vaccine are also very rare. While you used the word, you QUOTED (well, posted a pic and circled it). The word "rare" was used by a third party. I'm not too bothered by how you use the word rare because you have not been using it incorrectly; I'm more hoping the consistency that the CDC has used the word would be evident. It has not been "proven to be quite elastic" at all. To believe that the CDC would be "elastic" in their use of a word like that should show the reader that you are not understanding the full context. For example: Deaths LINKED to the COVID vaccine in the US are 3. Yes. That's 3. And to remind you: Those 3 blood clots were from the J&J vaccine (or was it Astrozeneca?) and you'll recall that the dispensation of those vaccines temporarily or altogether stopped. THAT'S how sensitive the threshold is. Deaths linked to people who have RECEIVED the vaccine: 6300 or so; but no analyzed link. 6300, alone, sounds worrisome. But then you can remember that over 339 million DOSES have been put into arms suddenly that number should be laughably small (.00018%) So let's compare: 339,000,000 ---> 6300 That is CRAZY rare; like, that fits the definition of of "rare" because, of the possible out comes, it is a very infrequent outcome. At the same time, the COVID reticent indicated back in 2020 that "almost nobody under 60 EVER dies from this disease because it's just the flu". Quick and dirty math shows that ABOUT 175,000 people age 64 and under died. [URL]https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Deaths-by-Sex-and-Age/9bhg-hcku[/URL] I'm, sadly, too lazy to get the number of people under age 65 who have been infected with COVID but the TOTAL so far is 40million. To (imperfectly) compare, this will give you a LOWER (MORE rare) outcome but.... That works out to about 0.4% of the population under 65 who contracted COVID. If you were to compare 0.4% and 0.00018%, a person should recognize thatsuggesting the relative incidents of both of these percentages are both "comparable" and both "rare", is really imprecise at best, but mostly just illogical. I mean, it's 2000x different. The application of the word (or really concept) "rare" has shown to be terrifyingly inconsistent to folks who "haven't bought the COVID narrative". I wonder if there's a correlation in misunderstanding/misapplication of terms and reluctance to believe the science. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Vaccinated are 13 times more likely to get covid than those with naturally acquired immunity
Top
Bottom