COVID-19 / Coronavirus Pandemic


FBnil

geekologie is no more :(
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
4,833
Location
Yurp

FBnil

geekologie is no more :(
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
4,833
Location
Yurp
According to this Dutch Newspaper, all the secondary effects of the covid injection are just in your head (nocebo effect).

Dutch site: https://www.trouw.nl/wetenschap/bij...t-vooral-in-het-hoofd-van-ontvanger~bd83abf2/

Translated(Google):

So this is just hypochondriac people:

Hypochondriac sporters just falling on the ground because it's in their head. Girls who lost their menstruation for over 6 months? You guessed it! It's all in their head! Stop playing dead already, hypochondriac!

Post automatically merged:

Catching Covid the natural way gives you 8? times more protection? Nah... 2 vaccines and 2 boosters surely are better (they got electrolytes!)
Silly Reuters! Vaccination is the only way forward! (that, and the microchip in your body)

Hey boardmembers, you think I'm joking about the electrolytes?? I'm not!

Sodium... drink soda! Potasium... uh... smoke pot! And calcium... go suck on some chalk (or lick the chalk board).... and also important: get serially monitored
(daisychain in serial some old computer monitors, then proceed to throw them up in the air and wait for gravity/buoyancy to do it's work. Haven't heared anyone coughing after this procedure, so it works 100%).


6. MODIFIED: Lift or ease international traffic bans as they do not provide added value
Wait... during an Omicron Pandemic? Are they crazy? Oh wait... with the restrictions they can't deploy military forces around the world... wars must go on! Lift the ban!
 
Last edited:

ible

professional vim user
Joined
Mar 24, 2014
Messages
2,577
Location
Seattle, WA
...

Catching Covid the natural way gives you 8? times more protection? Nah... 2 vaccines and 2 boosters surely are better


people who die from COVID don't get protection in the future from it. the vaccine doesn't kill you...

my daughter got COVID last week. it seemed to be pretty mild, and surprisingly my son didn't seem to catch it. we did keep them isolated the first couple days, and wearing masks for another couple days. hopefully there are no bad long term effects for her :(.
 

FBnil

geekologie is no more :(
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
4,833
Location
Yurp
hopefully there are no bad long term effects for her :(.
Ah, you fear the effects of spikes and long-covid? Yeah... Keep them well fed with lots of vitamins and minerals and the body will do the rest.
 

TeDaDeS

Hardcore Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2004
Messages
1,539
Location
The Netherlands
Website
Visit site
people who die from COVID don't get protection in the future from it. the vaccine doesn't kill you...
While I would agree with your statement as in general this statement is true, and the reason why vulnerable people should get vaccinated, there are some people that did die from the vaccine.
You could say this from all medication in general probably, but on average the vaccine is more risky compared to other vaccines. But this risk is still very low compared to getting covid, so it looks like in most cases the vaccine is a better choice then covid.
This balance between risk and reward has shifted though with omicron. And this balance was always different for young and healthy people, note that even there the risk appears low for health impact from the vaccine.

Examples:
"Vietnam on Nov. 30 rolled out its COVID vaccination program for children 15 to 17 years old with Pfizer’s vaccine. Since then, three children have died after receiving their first dose."
source: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/teens-hospitalized-dead-pfizer-vaccine-vietnam/
"Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause. Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. More than 529 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through January 18, 2022. During this time, VAERS received 11,468 reports of death (0.0022%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. CDC and FDA clinicians review reports of death to VAERS including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records."
source: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html

And we still don't know everything we need to know regarding these vaccines. We know for most people it doesn't have a direct negative impact.
But we'll learn more over time, which might change the advice we would give to the younger and healthier population. Especially if they recovered from omicron.

An article on topic for the vaccine risk/reward balance: https://joomi.substack.com/p/i-was-deceived-about-covid-vaccine
And a link in this article from a 2017 post regarding ModeRNA's troubles with mRNA: https://www.statnews.com/2017/01/10/moderna-trouble-mrna/
 
Last edited:

pyrat

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
952
Since I see continuing interest on Cannabis, here's this article FWIW. It says a component of cannabis helps against SARS-Cov-2 in vitro, but another component inhibits the first one. So probably no therapy with the whole pot. At most some derivative, and only if further research succeeds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rSl

JDTAY

Half Pepperoni, All Cheese
Joined
Sep 15, 2015
Messages
2,960
Age
34
Location
North Carolina, USA
I hear BA.2, aka stealth Omicron, is now outcompeting original Omicron in Denmark.

I wonder if this means a second Omicron wave will hit the world.
 

TeDaDeS

Hardcore Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2004
Messages
1,539
Location
The Netherlands
Website
Visit site
CDC shows some data on the difference between unvaccinated (the obvious line in the graph), and vaccinated people and people that had covid (natural immunity) the lines on the bottom.
While the vaccine appears to be a good defense, if you already had covid it gives the impression you are protected against covid in a similar way.

immunity.PNG
Source: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/pdfs/mm7104e1-H.pdf
 

pyrat

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
952
CDC shows some data on the difference between unvaccinated (the obvious line in the graph), and vaccinated people and people that had covid (natural immunity) the lines on the bottom.
While the vaccine appears to be a good defense, if you already had covid it gives the impression you are protected against covid in a similar way.

View attachment 37807
Source: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/pdfs/mm7104e1-H.pdf
Well, yes that was for Delta and few months after vaccination. I still think that vaccines prevent severe COVID and death, but omicron has diminished that. It's not so much that they don't lower the risks of one person, it's that it spreads to so many people that it makes it much more likely to hit you once and again, and it may eventually get you. You're still worse off unvaccinated, possibly, but it's not so clear as it was. And I fear there's so much spread that mutations are going to come ever more often. They don't have to be worse mutations, but they may, and I don't think vaccines can be developed and tested fast enough if we just let the virus run.
That Danish study seemed to say that vaccines prevented a little Delta spread, but very little Omicron (december 2021). I guess Omicron mildness makes up for it.
Household transmission risk (SAR)OmicronDelta
Unvaccinated29%28%
vaccinated / recovered32%19%
boosted25%11%
Yet Zürich reports immunization state in hospitals. I don't have time to count now but it does seem vaccines still keep you out of hospital 3 out of 4 times or 6 out of 7 if you're boosted ? Or should I think it over how to count it?
StatusSociety (pg.16)Hospital (pg.27)ICU (pg.28)
Unvaccinated27%60%71%
vaccinated once not fully3%4%1%
vaccinated unboosted27%23%19%
boosted43%13%10%
recovered19%??? (pg.3?)0%0%
About natural immunity, I've heard it seems having Omicron protects against having Omicron or Delta, but having Delta only protects against having Delta. I'm not sure how sure that is, though, at least in Zürich it doesn't seem so (too small sample?). And not sure how relevant it is because big spread means more chances for mutations.
Despite having lower severity in Catalonia Omicron is causing so many cases (3% of population last week tested positive, half of all COVID cases ever reported came last month), so many cases that deaths are higher than the last 2 outbreaks (11 months) ICU is about 2/3 of their record last winter and like last spring. Hospitalizations are higher than ever except last winter.
I mean one year ago or 14 months ago nobody was vaccinated. Yet hospitalizations, ICUS and deaths are approaching the numbers back then. I hope they don't climb more, but... So yes, I guess it would be worse without vaccines. But vaccines alone are not going to solve it.
 
Last edited:

netcat

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 3, 2016
Messages
984
Location
city of thieves
Nice summary. Still they are withholding key relationships such as deaths & hospitalisations vs age. Infection rate is meaningless but makes for startling trajectories. Zürich is my hometown which I never considered a propagandakanton.

Partial information = misinformation.

But vaccines alone are not going to solve it.
If the main incentive for vaccination campaigns is keeping people out of hospitals I don't understand why they are pushing them on the young. This suggests another motive.
 

FBnil

geekologie is no more :(
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
4,833
Location
Yurp
New and improved: Omicron 2! (site in Italian)
 

FBnil

geekologie is no more :(
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
4,833
Location
Yurp
Partial information = misinformation.
Not always. For example: Household transmission risk. There is a group that does not comply with covid rules, So they do not go to test, they do not appear in the graph (Pyrat's Danish study numbers).
We know there are asymptomatics... and those, won't go testing themselves because, depending on the country: If you do not have symptoms, don't go test yourself rules.

So many ways you can skew numbers...

For example in Tedades's graph... the unvaccinated-but-already-had-covid-but-not-registered should also be a line, and 8 times lower than the vaccinated line... it's absent from the graph (for obvious reasons), so what does that mean? Where do you keep getting unvaccinated-but-did-not-get-covid people from? At a certain point in time, everybody should have gotten it (and if you have good defenses, you might not even have noticed it). So that means that this line is very high, but have very few people and is thus, imho, statistical lying. (If you did not get the old variants, you'll certainly get Omicron I or II...before the end of February).

Then, in the Netherlands, the Health minister used a 15% instead of a 5% because he used "old numbers", and did not correct even when called out during a press conference. He was using partial information to make national decisions because that suits his agenda.

Then there are graphs that show the rise of Omicron. But no tests required to differentiate from Delta or Alpha, or Beta, or any of the other letters.

Then there's this “Paul Ehrlich Institute” in Germany that tests the quality of the Pfizer vaccines itself. But Pfizer gets to decide which ones get send to the lab for testing... interesting, right?
 
Last edited:

openbsd98324

Still Fresh
Joined
Jan 7, 2022
Messages
35
People are likely to be vaccinated in EU. That they want or not, really.

In some regions, in Germany, the shops are already divided in 2 : 1.) one area for people vaccinated 2.) second area of the shop, for people non vaccinated.
At entrance, they ask for vaccination papers.
 

pyrat

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
952
Still they are withholding key relationships such as deaths & hospitalisations vs age.

Blame me, not them. I think you can find that if you follow my links, but I tried to summarize.
There's not a source that gives all the data completely, but there's something.
I miss observational reports like these that divide people in groups according to time from last vaccination, to give an idea of how long vaccines or boosters last.
I have no evidence to back it but I suspect boosted get 25% SAR for Omicron and vaccinated nonboosted 32% not so much because of how many times they got essentially the same vaccines (they all code the same spike protein, more or less), but because those boosted have got their last shots more recently.

Infection rate is meaningless but makes for startling trajectories.
Not completely meaningless, it's a lower bound. There can be people reporting themselves ill when they're not (to excuse from work, etc.) but I think there're many more that don't get tested or reported.


Zürich is my hometown which I never considered a propagandakanton.
Never trust the data of a place with positivity over 30% (or even over 5%).They may be as honest as the best, but they're just not doing enough tests to know what's there. I liked that they separate their data according to immunization status.
We can still use their hospitalization data, though (despite false negatives in tests, and the nuance of in hospital with COVID or because of COVID, etc.). I may have misinterpreted something, though.
Btw. I assumed 1551000 is the Kanton population. If it's the city population I may have something wrong in my table.
Partial information = misinformation.
But the complete details can never be shared because of privacy concerns, so reports muss aggregate somehow. It all comes to what someone considers important.

If the main incentive for vaccination campaigns is keeping people out of hospitals I don't understand why they are pushing them on the young. This suggests another motive.
Look at data per age group. Kids, teenagers and young adults are most of the cases. Also because schools and Universities may require tests that families and offices don't require.
But because the young are less vaccinated too, and they vacciante them to try to prevent them spreading it to other groups. But they won't succeed because vaccines aren't good enough at preventing transmission.
Even if vaccines don't cause less transmission (not much, not long), they are used as an excuse to excempt the vaccinated to quarantine and keep shops and offices open.
Even for kids, they may let them go to school when positive or contact if they're vaccinated, so that their parents can go to work.
They will infect others and some will feel bad enough that they need to stay home with some parent, so the policy is doomed to fail, but they don't care. Very few kids will die of COVID or vaccines. At least in the immediate future.
It's all make believe. If they didn't vaccinate the young they'd have no excuse to change policies on quarantines and adminission and so.
I think many authorities in the EU have just surrendered and will let everyone get Omicron and hope for some natural immunity from that.
They can't say so because they'd look incompetent and more importantly someone would sue them to try to recover losses from so many medical leave and business interruption.
But they don't think they can do anything useful any more, and they need to pretend they're still trying and failing, to collect less blame.
Blame or not blame I think they'll get off the hook no matter what the balance finally is, because society is mostly fed up and they prefer death and suffering than lockdowns
(Actually they prefer a lottery where they may win mild COVID with maybe immunity, or death or suffering, over a safer mandated lockdown where they can't win or lose or take decisions),
so authorities may be negligent homicides, but with the consent of most of their victims. I'm kind of in a ship full of feeling lucky fools.
Lockdowns may not be economically sustainable anyway (they are, just not with the EU economy which is terribly organised).
And they may not be psicologically sustainable (they are, just not with the EU commonly held philosophies).
And I don't know what else might stop this wave besides lockdowns.
So back to the old European tradition of plague, famine and war (I wish it was only European). The tradition is surviving peasants don't get to blame and overthrow anyone in particular, so must look as good policy.
On the bright side, biology has got humans over many difficult situations, and vaccines give some protection, so there'll be survivors. It might even be no worse than it has been. Who knows?
Not always. For example: Household transmission risk. There is a group that does not comply with covid rules, So they do not go to test, they do not appear in the graph (Pyrat's Danish study numbers).
We know there are asymptomatics... and those, won't go testing themselves because, depending on the country: If you do not have symptoms, don't go test yourself rules.
Sure. The particular statistics in Danish studies is for households that knew one member was positive and could decide what measures to take.
There's a lot of asymptomatic transmission, public transport, lots of scenarios that are not similar to what they looked at.
But you can't blame someone for only looking at the data they can get.
So many ways you can skew numbers...
Yes, and even without intent to skew you may not have all the data no matter how hard you try.
But you can skew appreciations of reality without numbers too, so that's no reason not to look at the numbers you can get.
You have to keep in mind you're not seeing the whole picture, that's all.
For example in Tedades's graph... the unvaccinated-but-already-had-covid-but-not-registered should also be a line, and 8 times lower than the vaccinated line...
How do you know it's 8 times lower (couldn't it be 4 or 16 or anything?)

it's absent from the graph (for obvious reasons), so what does that mean? Where do you keep getting unvaccinated-but-did-not-get-covid people from?
Some people are naturally immune to COVID-19. I don't know how many, or how to tell which ones.
I've heard of studies trying to find biomarkers that predict the severity of COVID but I'm not aware of anything definitive.
Other than young healthier people fare better than old or comorbid cases, like for so many other diseases. But those who fare better still pass it along to those who don't.
At a certain point in time, everybody should have gotten it (and if you have good defenses, you might not even have noticed it).
Yes.
So that means that this line is very high, but have very few people and is thus, imho, statistical lying. (If you did not get the old variants, you'll certainly get Omicron I or II...before the end of February).
I'm lost here. Which line ?
Then, in the Netherlands, the Health minister used a 15% instead of a 5% because he used "old numbers", and did not correct even when called out during a press conference. He was using partial information to make national decisions because that suits his agenda.
Never let truth ruin a good story. There were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, great value in mortgage derivatives, security in computers...
Then there are graphs that show the rise of Omicron. But no tests required to differentiate from Delta or Alpha, or Beta, or any of the other letters.
I assumed they plot those graphs from screening some random selection of test samples and sequencing them. Not very sure though.
Then there's this “Paul Ehrlich Institute” in Germany that tests the quality of the Pfizer vaccines itself. But Pfizer gets to decide which ones get send to the lab for testing... interesting, right?
I've sent some links to stories that cast doubt on how science based the decisions from PEI are. I don't know them, but it might be that the German government ay least uses them as excuses to set policy, "because scientists say so".
People are likely to be vaccinated in EU. That they want or not, really.
"all for the people, but without the people" was already the motto in illustrated despotism. Sad how history repeats itself.

In some regions, in Germany, the shops are already divided in 2 : 1.) one area for people vaccinated 2.) second area of the shop, for people non vaccinated.
At entrance, they ask for vaccination papers.
In Catalonia COVID passport rules expire today. Nobody knows whether they'll renew them or not. Whatever they do they'll say they're following some expert group of scientific advisors. Suspense...
 

FBnil

geekologie is no more :(
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
4,833
Location
Yurp
How do you know it's 8 times lower (couldn't it be 4 or 16 or anything?)
I think it was a study that I thought was fair and it stuck in my head. Can't find it at the moment though. But if you do not like the number, pick another:
CDC says at least 6 (so it can't be 4):
JHI says 27 (which is higher than 6, so yeah, why not):
This one says 13 (sound a bit low in my eyes):

The important thing is that they do not seem to factor in the fact that vaccination damages your natural immunity (we don't know for how long yet) and thus the difference looks bigger. Also age has not been factored in. So for children, the number must be close to factor 1 (vaccinated child as likely to get covid as an unvaccinated, because natural immunity, even when compromized a little is quite strong), and higher with elderly (because the natural immunity is already flakey and a little push (too much heat, too much cold, a little alergic reaction to adjuvants, etc) is enough to let them keel over.
I'm lost here. Which line ?
The blue continuous line for "Estimated hazard rate". That line represents less people, thus is statistically less important and therefore, another type of graph should be used. Else we can make a graph of people of the world v/s people from Yangsi and show that the latter group has 40% chance of dwarfism, versus rest of the world where the line is nigh zero. Everybody looks at the 40% and goes into panic mode.



I assumed they plot those graphs from screening some random selection of test samples and sequencing them. Not very sure though.
There are 2 ways:
1. Models (that could have had some bases in some initial numbers, usually a carefully selected subset, and they, say do a regression analysis and thus the model says, and you extrapolate for into the future.
2. Real data, real plots. (and as we know, there are always errors, unregistered things, etc.
 

levi

Still fresh, damnit!
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
15,614
Location
Somewhere off the coast of the EU
It seems reasonable to say that a delta infection confurs better protection against another delta infection. But does an omicron infection protect you against a delta infection as well as a vaccination does? Who can say.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rSl

netcat

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 3, 2016
Messages
984
Location
city of thieves
I heard that omicron and delta are not mutually exclusive. you can test positive for both simultaneously so this suggests no cross immunity. but this could be due tests not really working so who knows.

I was about to say all this biochemistry is a bit out of hand maybe we should stick to more basic things like farming but we found a way to fuck that up too (ruined the planet).
 
Top