12 important questions and answers before considering vaccination

[Oliver George]

> https://www.infowars.com/posts/this-information-could-destroy-the-covid-hoax-forever/


Here are 12 important questions and answers before considering getting vaccinated:


Q: If I get vaccinated can I stop wearing a mask(s)?

Government: NO


Q: If I get vaccinated will the restaurants, bars, schools, fitness clubs, hair salons, etc. reopen and will people be able to get back to work like
normal?

Government: NO


Q: If I get vaccinated will I be resistant to Covid?

Government: Maybe. We don’t know exactly, but probably not.


Q: If I get vaccinated, at least I won’t be contagious to others – right?

Government: NO. the vaccine doesn’t stop transmission.


Q: If I get vaccinated, how long will the vaccine last?

Government: No one knows. All Covid vaccines are still in the experimental stage.


Q: If I get vaccinated, can I stop social distancing?

Government: NO


Q: If my parents, grandparents and myself all get vaccinated can we hug each other again?

Government: NO


Q: So what’s the benefit of getting vaccinated?

Government: Hoping that the virus won’t kill you.


Q: Are you sure the vaccine won’t injure or kill me?

Government: NO


Q: If statistically the virus won’t kill me (99.7% survival rate), why should I get vaccinated?

Government: To protect others.


Q: So if I get vaccinated, I can protect 100% of people I come in contact with?

Government: NO


Q: If I experience a severe adverse reaction, long-term effects (still unknown) or die from the vaccine, will I (or my family) be compensated from
the vaccine manufacturer or the Government?

Government: NO – the government and vaccine manufacturers have zero liability regarding this experimental drug


> https://www.infowars.com/posts/this-information-could-destroy-the-covid-hoax-forever/

[Bod]

infowars? A typical misinformation twisting site.
Get the vaccine, you fool and read a reliable source for your info.

[angelica...@yahoo.com]

On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 1:54:17 PM UTC-4, Oliver George wrote:
> > https://www.infowars.com/posts/this-information-could-destroy-the-covid-hoax-forever/

And you still cannot differentiate a credible source from pure crap.

> Here are 12 important questions and answers before considering getting vaccinated:
>
>
> Q: If I get vaccinated can I stop wearing a mask(s)?
>
> Government: NO

Fine. Wearing a mask is not onerous.

> Q: If I get vaccinated will the restaurants, bars, schools, fitness clubs, hair salons, etc. reopen and will people be able to get back to work like
> normal?
>
> Government: NO

I've been working unvaccinated all year. I'll be happy for everybody
at my office to be vacinnated.

> Q: If I get vaccinated will I be resistant to Covid?
>
> Government: Maybe. We don’t know exactly, but probably not.

That's wrong. The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
Johnson & Johnson, 66%.

> Q: If I get vaccinated, at least I won’t be contagious to others – right?
>
> Government: NO. the vaccine doesn’t stop transmission.

It reduces transmission.

> Q: If I get vaccinated, how long will the vaccine last?
>
> Government: No one knows. All Covid vaccines are still in the experimental stage.

Which is true of every new vaccine.

> Q: If I get vaccinated, can I stop social distancing?
>
> Government: NO

Who cares? I don't want to get close to anybody but my husband.

> Q: If my parents, grandparents and myself all get vaccinated can we hug each other again?
>
> Government: NO

Another big slug of indifference.

> Q: So what’s the benefit of getting vaccinated?
>
> Government: Hoping that the virus won’t kill you.

So if you contract COVID-19, it won't be as severe, and you won't
be as infectious.

> Q: Are you sure the vaccine won’t injure or kill me?
>
> Government: NO

Any vaccine has that possibility. Yet we all got the smallpox vaccine
and others.

> Q: If statistically the virus won’t kill me (99.7% survival rate), why should I get vaccinated?
>
> Government: To protect others.
>
>
> Q: So if I get vaccinated, I can protect 100% of people I come in contact with?
>
> Government: NO

Nothing is 100%.

> Q: If I experience a severe adverse reaction, long-term effects (still unknown) or die from the vaccine, will I (or my family) be compensated from
> the vaccine manufacturer or the Government?
>
> Government: NO – the government and vaccine manufacturers have zero liability regarding this experimental drug

Just like any other vaccine administered to millions of people
every single year.

Cindy Hamilton

[micky]

In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 19 Mar 2021 13:54:11 -0400, Oliver George
<oli...@metronet.invalid> wrote:

>> https://www.infowars.com/posts/this-information-could-destroy-the-covid-hoax-forever/


Infowars.

Here's a few more important questiosn they didn't include:

If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to get sick?

Yes.

If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to need a hospital?

Yes.

If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to get sent to the Intensive
Care Unit?

Yes.

If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to die?

Yes. 100,000 times more likely. Probably a million times.

If I don't get vaccinated and I don't die, am I more likely to have new
long-term health problems?

Yes. As much as a 33% chance of that.

If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to make my family and
friends sick?

Yes.

If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to send some of my family
and friends to the hospital?

Yes. At least the ones too stupid to have gotten vaccinated.

If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to send some of my family
and friends to the ICU?

Yes. At least the ones too stupid to have gotten vaccinated.

If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to kill some of my family
and friends?

Yes. At least the ones too stupid to have gotten vaccinated.

If I don't get vaccinated, will most people think I'm stupid?

Yes.

If I don't get vaccinated, will they be right?

Yes.

[Rod Speed]

Oliver George <oli...@metronet.invalid> wrote

>> https://www.infowars.com/posts/this-information-could-destroy-the-covid-hoax-forever/

Wota stunningly impeccable source...

> Here are 12 important questions and answers before considering getting
> vaccinated:
>
>
> Q: If I get vaccinated can I stop wearing a mask(s)?
>
> Government: NO

But will be able to once most are vaccinated.

> Q: If I get vaccinated will the restaurants, bars, schools, fitness
> clubs, hair salons, etc. reopen and will people be able to get back to
> work like normal?
>
> Government: NO

But will be able to once most are vaccinated.

> Q: If I get vaccinated will I be resistant to Covid?

> Government: Maybe. We don’t know exactly, but probably not.

That last is your bare faced lie. The govt never said that.

> Q: If I get vaccinated, at least I won’t be contagious to others – right?

> Government: NO. the vaccine doesn’t stop transmission.

Corse it does if it stops you getting infected.

> Q: If I get vaccinated, how long will the vaccine last?

> Government: No one knows. All Covid vaccines are still in the experimental
> stage.

But we do know that only a microscopic number have
caught the virus more than once and that the vaccines
produce a much better immune response than getting
infected does, so it is certain it will last for more than
a year with most people.

> Q: If I get vaccinated, can I stop social distancing?
>
> Government: NO

But will be able to once most are vaccinated.

> Q: If my parents, grandparents and myself all get vaccinated can we hug
> each other again?
>
> Government: NO

But will be able to once most are vaccinated.

> Q: So what’s the benefit of getting vaccinated?
>
> Government: Hoping that the virus won’t kill you.

It isnt a hope, it’s a near certainty and
you wont get severe disease either.

> Q: Are you sure the vaccine won’t injure or kill me?
>
> Government: NO

But getting infected is much more likely to do that.

> Q: If statistically the virus won’t kill me (99.7% survival rate),

That’s a lie with those over 65.

> why should I get vaccinated?

> Government: To protect others.

The govt says much more than that.

> Q: So if I get vaccinated, I can protect 100% of people I come in contact
> with?
>
> Government: NO

> Q: If I experience a severe adverse reaction, long-term effects (still
> unknown) or die from the vaccine, will I (or my family) be compensated
> from the vaccine manufacturer or the Government?

> Government: NO – the government and vaccine manufacturers have zero
> liability regarding this experimental drug

You wont get compensated if the virus kills you or you get serious
long term effect as a result of being infected either, fuckwit.

>> https://www.infowars.com/posts/this-information-could-destroy-the-covid-hoax-forever/

[Rod Speed]

"angelica...@yahoo.com" <angelica...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aecf03c4-af62-41aa...@googlegroups.com...

> On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 1:54:17 PM UTC-4, Oliver George wrote:
>> > https://www.infowars.com/posts/this-information-could-destroy-the-covid-hoax-forever/
>
> And you still cannot differentiate a credible source from pure crap.
>
>> Here are 12 important questions and answers before considering getting
>> vaccinated:
>>
>>
>> Q: If I get vaccinated can I stop wearing a mask(s)?
>>
>> Government: NO
>
> Fine. Wearing a mask is not onerous.
>
>> Q: If I get vaccinated will the restaurants, bars, schools, fitness
>> clubs, hair salons, etc. reopen and will people be able to get back to
>> work like
>> normal?
>>
>> Government: NO
>
> I've been working unvaccinated all year. I'll be happy for everybody
> at my office to be vacinnated.
>
>> Q: If I get vaccinated will I be resistant to Covid?
>>
>> Government: Maybe. We don’t know exactly, but probably not.
>
> That's wrong. The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
> Johnson & Johnson, 66%.

Those are the numbers for avoiding serious disease, not for getting
infected.

[Peeler]

On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 06:04:26 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the trolling senile Australian pest's latest trollshit unread>

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 86-year-old senile Australian
cretin's pathological trolling:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/rod-speed-faq.2973853/

[gfre...@aol.com]

If you can't attack the message, shoot the messenger.
Why didn't you tell us what part was wrong?
I just saw Fauci tell Rand Paul all of those things the other day on
C-Span. (that is live congress TV, not some opinion network).

[gfre...@aol.com]

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 14:53:38 -0400, micky <NONONO...@fmguy.com>
wrote:

You missed the point Fauci and his gang said. The vaccine is not
proven to reduce transmission so you are not protecting others.

Cindy just said this about it protecting you.

"The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
Johnson & Johnson, 66%."

Since the survival rate of unvaccinated people is 99.7% or so those
numbers are somewhat un reassuring.
I am doing the Pfizer Sunday but mostly because it was free and easy.
I am not convinced it is going to improve my life much if I still need
to wear a mask and avoid seeing people according to the government.
I am only lucky that my state is not run by the Branch Covidian cult
and we can get out and do things if we want. The results still have us
in the middle of the pack in spite of a very high median age, lots of
outsiders coming and going and nothing really closed.
States like California struggle to explain it and CNN is just
gobsmacked by it.

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 3/19/2021 1:54 PM, Oliver George wrote:
>> https://www.infowars.com/posts/this-information-could-destroy-the-covid-hoax-forever/
>>
>
>
> Here are 12 important questions and answers before considering getting
> vaccinated:
>

If we all get vaccinated most of those "no" become "yes". Inforwars
just likes to be contrary and stir up shit. They don't give the facts
and reasoning behind it.

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 3/19/2021 3:39 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:

>
> If you can't attack the message, shoot the messenger.
> Why didn't you tell us what part was wrong?
> I just saw Fauci tell Rand Paul all of those things the other day on
> C-Span. (that is live congress TV, not some opinion network).
>

Must have watched a different episode. I saw Paul interrupting Fauci as
he tried to explain the reason and the varients that may or may not be
protected.

Rand Paul just wanted to show off and be a bully.

[micky]

In alt.home.repair, on Sat, 20 Mar 2021 06:04:26 +1100, "Rod Speed"

<rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>> Q: If I get vaccinated will I be resistant to Covid?
>
>> Government: Maybe. We don’t know exactly, but probably not.
>
>That last is your bare faced lie. The govt never said that.

That's for sure. Everyone but liars and dumbbells say that even the
least good of the vaccines makes one resistant. Not 100%, but
"resistance" doesn't even imply 100%, so "resistant" is still accurate.

>
>> Q: If I get vaccinated, at least I won’t be contagious to others – right?
>
>> Government: NO. the vaccine doesn’t stop transmission.

Government never said that either. At most they said, We don't know.
Since then there is a lot of evidence for Pfizer that it does.

>
>Corse it does if it stops you getting infected.

Rest omitted. I've spent more time than it's worth arguing with this
dummy.

What is it that makes some people so stupid? I really don't get it.
Did they get D's and F's in school? Are they on drugs or liquor? Did
they go without oxygen in the birth canal? Were they abused as
children? Do they only watch stupid TV and read stupid websites. I
know the latter is part of it, but how can they be so stupid they
discount everything else they read and sometimes they at least read the
answers they get here.

[Scott Lurndal]

gfre...@aol.com writes:

>
>"The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
>Johnson & Johnson, 66%."
>
>Since the survival rate of unvaccinated people is 99.7% or so those
>numbers are somewhat un reassuring.

You are comparing
apples to oranges. You cannot extrapolate from the
death rate of those who have so far had the virus to the
entire population, the majority of which have not contracted
the virus. So your 99.7% number is meaningless, wrong and dangerous.

Note that the survival rate for all vaccines is 100%, as
even if one does get the virus after vaccination, the symptoms are significantly
milder, if even detectable.

[Rod Speed]

<gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:eav95g9bdpvns12h0...@4ax.com...

Like hell you did, liar.

[Rod Speed]

<gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1iv95g9hqb4i2f70m...@4ax.com...

Nope, you did, as always.

> The vaccine is not proven to reduce transmission

YET, but it will do soon and is already starting to be proven in Israel.

> so you are not protecting others.

You are actually, its just not PROVEN yet.

> Cindy just said this about it protecting you.

That about protecting you from severe
disease, not transmission of the virus.

> "The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
> Johnson & Johnson, 66%."

Its actually more complicated than that with J&J. If fact
it saw 100% protection against being killed by infection.

> Since the survival rate of unvaccinated people is 99.7% or so

More bogus stats with those over 65.

> those numbers are somewhat un reassuring.

Only for fuckwits like you.

> I am doing the Pfizer Sunday but mostly because it was free and easy.
> I am not convinced it is going to improve my life much if I still need
> to wear a mask and avoid seeing people according to the government.

That's only until enough get vaccinated, fuckwit.

> I am only lucky that my state is not run by the Branch Covidian
> cult and we can get out and do things if we want. The results still
> have us in the middle of the pack in spite of a very high median
> age, lots of outsiders coming and going and nothing really closed.

And you wouldn't be in the middle of the pack if you lot did thing better,
stupid.

> States like California struggle to explain it and CNN is just gobsmacked
> by it.

More mindless bullshit.

[Rod Speed]

"micky" <NONONO...@fmguy.com> wrote in message
news:6a1a5gd954lf77007...@4ax.com...

> In alt.home.repair, on Sat, 20 Mar 2021 06:04:26 +1100, "Rod Speed"
> <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>> Q: If I get vaccinated will I be resistant to Covid?
>>
>>> Government: Maybe. We don't know exactly, but probably not.
>>
>>That last is your bare faced lie. The govt never said that.
>
> That's for sure. Everyone but liars and dumbbells say that even the
> least good of the vaccines makes one resistant. Not 100%, but
> "resistance" doesn't even imply 100%, so "resistant" is still accurate.
>>

>>> Q: If I get vaccinated, at least I won't be contagious to others -

>>> right?
>>
>>> Government: NO. the vaccine doesn't stop transmission.
>
> Government never said that either. At most they said, We don't know.
> Since then there is a lot of evidence for Pfizer that it does.
>>
>>Corse it does if it stops you getting infected.
>
> Rest omitted. I've spent more time than it's worth arguing with this
> dummy.

> What is it that makes some people so stupid? I really don't get it.

They desperately seek anything that hints at maybe supporting their
prejudices.

> Did they get D's and F's in school?

Plenty didn't.

> Are they on drugs or liquor? Did they go without oxygen
> in the birth canal? Were they abused as children?

Very likely all of the above.

> Do they only watch stupid TV and read stupid websites.

Clearly they do.

> I know the latter is part of it, but how can they be so
> stupid they discount everything else they read and
> sometimes they at least read the answers they get here.

That's the way so many are.

[Rod Speed]

"Scott Lurndal" <sc...@slp53.sl.home> wrote in message
news:GL75I.15915$t66....@fx38.iad...

> gfre...@aol.com writes:
>
>>
>>"The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
>>Johnson & Johnson, 66%."
>>
>>Since the survival rate of unvaccinated people is 99.7% or so those
>>numbers are somewhat un reassuring.
>
> You are comparing
> apples to oranges. You cannot extrapolate from the
> death rate of those who have so far had the virus to the
> entire population, the majority of which have not contracted
> the virus.

Corse you can when the virus is roughly evenly spread
amongst the population with no evidence that those
where the virus is much less commonly seen behave
any differently to a virus infection.

So your 99.7% number is meaningless, wrong and dangerous.

> Note that the survival rate for all vaccines is 100%,

No it isnt. I tiny handful do get killed by the vaccine.

Far fewer than get killed by the virus, but still not 0 with any vaccine.

> as even if one does get the virus after vaccination,
> the symptoms are significantly milder, if even detectable.

That’s a different issue to being killed by the virus.

[Peeler]

On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 08:48:50 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent

Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest trollshit unread>

--
John addressing the senile Australian pest:
"You are a complete idiot. But you make me larf. LOL"
MID: <f9056fe6-1479-40ff...@googlegroups.com>

[Peeler]

"Rod Speed is an entirely modern phenomenon. Essentially, Rod Speed
is an insecure and worthless individual who has discovered he can
enhance his own self-esteem in his own eyes by playing "the big, hard
man" on the InterNet."

https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/rod-speed-faq.2973853/

--
Norman Wells addressing trolling senile Rodent:
"Ah, the voice of scum speaks."
MID: <g4t0jt...@mid.individual.net>

[Roger Blake]

On 2021-03-19, micky <NONONO...@fmguy.com> wrote:
> Here's a few more important questiosn they didn't include:
>
> If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to get sick?
>
> Yes.

> ...

An important question for you:

If I take one of these experimental vaccines that have received only
very limited testing, and are approved for emergency use only, and I
develop problems from it a year or more from now will YOU accept
financial liability for that? The vaccine manufacturers are shielded
from liability, so having held yourself out as a medical expert and
advised me to take part in this medical experiment, will YOU step up
to the plate if I am harmed?

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Posts from Google Groups killfiled due to excess spam.)

The fraud of "Climate Change" -- https://RealClimateScience.com
Don't talk to cops! -- https://DontTalkToCops.com
Badges don't grant extra rights -- https://CopBlock.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[hub...@ccanoemail.ca]

On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 00:20:40 -0000 (UTC), Roger Blake
<rogb...@iname.invalid> wrote:

>
>An important question for you:
>
>If I take one of these experimental vaccines that have received only
>very limited testing, and are approved for emergency use only, and I
>develop problems from it a year or more from now will YOU accept
>financial liability for that? The vaccine manufacturers are shielded
>from liability, so having held yourself out as a medical expert and
>advised me to take part in this medical experiment, will YOU step up
>to the plate if I am harmed?

I'm not aware of anyone being forced to be vaccinated.

Idiots be idiots is all. You qualify ..

John T.

[Bob F]

Actually, they are all close to 100% effective on avoiding
hospitalization or death.

[Ed Pawlowski]

Yes, an important consideration. People have been in the hospital and
on ventilators for long periods so just eliminating that is a big factor.

[Rod Speed]

"Bob F" <bobn...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:s33gv1$f8i$1...@dont-email.me...

That’s less clear with the russian, chinese and indian vaccines.

[Rod Speed]

"Ed Pawlowski" <e...@snet.xxx> wrote in message
news:qNb5I.656$SE7...@fx22.iad...

And there is now some evidence that those with long covid
are do considerably better after being vaccinated too.

[gfre...@aol.com]

I saw Fauci telling us they don't know, over and over again about
everything.
Will they ever know enough to say it is 100% safe and will he get away
from the hysteria before then?
At a certain point we need the information to take a calculated risk
and isn't life just a series of calculated risks anyway?
We are quickly reaching the point that driving to the restaurant is
more dangerous than going in, mask or not.
The question Paul asked is, if your are vaccinated, why aren't you
safe and it is a good question. If not, why get the shot?

[gfre...@aol.com]

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 20:24:06 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

If Fauci had said that Paul would not have had much more to say

Why are we still running scared even after vaccination?

[gfre...@aol.com]

Maybe you need to get informed then.
There are employers planning on requiring it along with airlines and
maybe even some other businesses. It is still yet to see how pervasive
the Covid passport is going to be.
You can duck it but your life may not be the same.

[Ed Pawlowski]

Every time Fauci tried to explain about the variants Paul cut him off.
He asked questions but did not want to hear answers, he wanted to make
his own statement.

https://tinyurl.com/336xnms7

Paul comes across as an arrogant politician that wants to show how smart
he is.

[Dean Hoffman]

Because Fauci gets invited places if we're scared of the virus.

"The Federal Government is exploiting public fear to redefine the relationship between the rulers and the American people. "
James Bovard

[Rod Speed]

<gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:6goa5g19sn8e3e3n8...@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:58:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:
>
>>On 3/19/2021 3:39 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> If you can't attack the message, shoot the messenger.
>>> Why didn't you tell us what part was wrong?
>>> I just saw Fauci tell Rand Paul all of those things the other day on
>>> C-Span. (that is live congress TV, not some opinion network).
>>>
>>
>>Must have watched a different episode. I saw Paul interrupting Fauci as
>>he tried to explain the reason and the varients that may or may not be
>>protected.
>>
>>Rand Paul just wanted to show off and be a bully.
>
> I saw Fauci telling us they don't know,
> over and over again about everything.

Another bare faced lie. He never said that they
don't know about the effect of the vaccines on
the severity of the disease if you get infected.

> Will they ever know enough to say it is 100% safe

Nothing ever is. What matters is whether it's
a lot safer than getting infect by the virus when
not vaccinated and we already know that.

> and will he get away from the hysteria before then?

More of your flagrant dishonest, your trademark.

> At a certain point we need the information to take a calculated risk

We have that already, from the phase 3 trials.

> and isn't life just a series of calculated risks anyway?

Yes but for some odd reason we do vaccinate extensively
to reduce the risk of the downsides with that disease.

> We are quickly reaching the point that driving to the
> restaurant is more dangerous than going in, mask or not.

BULLSHIT.

> The question Paul asked is, if your are vaccinated, why aren't
> you safe and it is a good question. If not, why get the shot?

Because we know that it radically reduces the effect
of the disease if you get infected and likely will
radically reduce the risk of getting infected too, fuckwit.

[Rod Speed]

<gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:rtoa5g1ofsoigaet8...@4ax.com...

More bullshit. Paul was always going to rabbit on about
very little reinfection, ignoring that we know that's a lie
with particularly the more virulent south african variant.

> Why are we still running scared even after vaccination?

No one is running scared. It does make sense to continue
with masks until it becomes clear that the vaccines do
prevent infection with the more virulent strains which
do not have specific vaccines developed for yet.

[Rod Speed]

"Dean Hoffman" <dean...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:05d3e99d-7d72-4c4c...@googlegroups.com...

> On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 9:58:59 PM UTC-5, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 20:24:06 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>> wrote:
>> >gfre...@aol.com writes:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>"The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
>> >>Johnson & Johnson, 66%."
>> >>
>> >>Since the survival rate of unvaccinated people is 99.7% or so those
>> >>numbers are somewhat un reassuring.
>> >
>> >You are comparing
>> >apples to oranges. You cannot extrapolate from the
>> >death rate of those who have so far had the virus to the
>> >entire population, the majority of which have not contracted
>> >the virus. So your 99.7% number is meaningless, wrong and dangerous.
>> >
>> >Note that the survival rate for all vaccines is 100%, as
>> >even if one does get the virus after vaccination, the symptoms are
>> >significantly
>> >milder, if even detectable.
>> If Fauci had said that Paul would not have had much more to say
>>
>> Why are we still running scared even after vaccination?

We arent.

> Because Fauci gets invited places if we're scared of the virus.

Bullshit, he actually gets invited to say what should be done about the

virus.

> "The Federal Government is exploiting public fear to redefine
> the relationship between the rulers and the American people. "
> James Bovard

More mindless bullshit.

[micky]

In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:54:19 -0400,

You have a pretty obvious mistake here. All you can say is, "The vaccine
is not proven to reduce transmission so IT IS NOT PROVEN THAT you are
protecting others." I don't have to explain why this sentence is
correct, right?

Further, there is quite a bit of evidence from israel that Pfizer does
reduce transmission, and Moderna is basically the same as Pfizer, so
that's another mistake.

>Cindy just said this about it protecting you.
>
>"The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
>Johnson & Johnson, 66%."
>
>Since the survival rate of unvaccinated people is 99.7% or so those
>numbers are somewhat un reassuring.

Scott is right. If you're comparing 94.1, 95, and 99.7, you shouldn't
be. They represent two different things that are independent of each
other.

>I am doing the Pfizer Sunday but mostly because it was free and easy.
>I am not convinced it is going to improve my life much if I still need
>to wear a mask and avoid seeing people according to the government.

That's the thing so many people don't appreciate. You're not sick now
and if you don't get sick in the next 2 years, you probably won't know
-- I don't know how you could know -- if it's because you didn't meet
anyone with Corona, you did but you wouldn't have caught it from him
anyhow, or you would have caught it but the vaccine saved you.

But be assured, I don't know what all the percentage are but if you were
not vaccinated and you are not a hermit (and especially if everyone else
wasn't vaccinated but even if 50% or 90% of the people were) there is
good chance you would catch the virus, and if you did, a 10% chance you
would end up in the hospital, and 1) a 10% chance within that you would
end up in the ICU, and I'm guessing a more than 50% chance within that
that you would end up dead. and 2) a 33% chance you'd have long-term
sequelae**, serious medical problems.

But becaue the vaccine has a 95% chance that it would save you from all
of that, if you're not convinced now, and you don't believe what
researchers says, there will be nothing in particular to convince you in
the future. Many things, including I'm sure many things you believe,
can only be proven by statistically. But people pick certain things to
not believe statistics for.

And lets say 300 million Americans got the vaccine, and it's 5%
in-effective. That's 15 million people, and some percentage of them may
meet someone contagious, and he may end up sick, and instead of a 10%
chance he'd end up in the hospital, maybe there's a 1% chance he would
(and a 0% chance he'd end up in the ICU), but when some anti-vaxer finds
one of these people, and there are likely to be 10 or 100 or 100's out
of 300 million, they will announce that the vaccine didn't do anything,
that the virus faded away on its own, like some do. Even though it
didn't.

Most of the people who don't like this vaccine still took all the other
vaccines, and still gave them to their children. The odds that measles
would seriuosly injure a child was always very low -- I had measles. My
parents weren't worried, afaik -- but the measles vaccine made it near
zero. The same people who don't like these vaccines still gave their
children the measles vaccine.

When polio was at its worst, the odds were still slim that any given
child (or adult) would get polio, but if you got it, it was terrible,
sometimes fatal, sometimes lifetime paralysis, so just about everyone
rushed to get it, even though they would probably would never have
gotten polio anyhow.

Other diseases were the same.

So why is this time different. I can think of only one reason.

Only in the age of trump and several other mostly Republican idiots has
medicine and statistics been overridden for some by idolatry (of trump)
and partisanship. If we'd had any other president including even** Ted
Cruz, we would have lost 200 or 300,000 dead, let's exaggerate and say
400,000, but not 550,000 and climbing. Yesterday or the day before
trump said it's a good vaccine and people should get it, and he said
something almost as "strong" at CPAC, but has it said it strong enough
or in a video PSA to change any minds? Has he insisted enough to make up
for months of denying it, for the time he claimed a little girl got ??
some dreaded illness from the vaccine? Had he not denied how serious
Corona was and had he belittled the doctors or the vaccine, we would not
have 50 million people or more who don't want the vaccine, who will make
a pool for the virus to continue to live, to mutate, and maybe infect
and kill people whose vaccine was not built on the mutation, and for
which it doens't work.

And now because you like trump, my previous paragraph will have undone
all the good that my words before it did, and you'll decide that any
sense I seemed to make in the first 80% of this past is nonsense because
I remind you that trump thinks*** the disease is a hoax, and has
minimized it from the start, including even his weak endorsement
yesterday (more than two months after he and Melania got vaccinated but
didn't tell anyone).


**I only save "even" because Ted Cruz was the second-worst Republican
candidate, not because he wouldn't have whole heartedly opposed Corona.
***So he says.

**Never had a chance to use that word before. I hope you are all
impressed.

[micky]

In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 19 Mar 2021 20:24:06 GMT,

The short answer is that Scott is right.

Greg, you know consciously or deep down how you want it to come out, so
you find "arguments" to make it come out that way, but you're making an
inapplicable argument here.

[Bod]

On 20/03/2021 00:20, Roger Blake wrote:
> On 2021-03-19, micky <NONONO...@fmguy.com> wrote:
>> Here's a few more important questiosn they didn't include:
>>
>> If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to get sick?
>>
>> Yes.
>> ...
>
> An important question for you:
>
> If I take one of these experimental vaccines that have received only
> very limited testing, and are approved for emergency use only, and I
> develop problems from it a year or more from now will YOU accept
> financial liability for that? The vaccine manufacturers are shielded
> from liability, so having held yourself out as a medical expert and
> advised me to take part in this medical experiment, will YOU step up
> to the plate if I am harmed?
>

If you don't trust the vaccine then don't have it. You have the choice.
It's as simple as that.

[Peeler]

On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 12:58:54 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent

Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

>> Actually, they are all close to 100% effective on avoiding hospitalization
>> or death.
>
> That’s less clear with the russian, chinese and indian vaccines.

Why do you say that, you depraved auto-contradicting senile Australian
asshole? Actually, those are known to be at least as effective!

--
Kerr-Mudd,John addressing the auto-contradicting senile cretin:
"Auto-contradictor Rod is back! (in the KF)"
MID: <XnsA97071CF43...@85.214.115.223>

[Peeler]

On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 16:42:52 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent

Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest trollshit unread>

--

The Natural Philosopher about senile Rodent:
"Rod speed is not a Brexiteer. He is an Australian troll and arsehole."
Message-ID: <pu07vj$s5$2...@dont-email.me>

[angelica...@yahoo.com]

On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 10:53:14 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:58:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:
>
> >On 3/19/2021 3:39 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> If you can't attack the message, shoot the messenger.
> >> Why didn't you tell us what part was wrong?
> >> I just saw Fauci tell Rand Paul all of those things the other day on
> >> C-Span. (that is live congress TV, not some opinion network).
> >>
> >
> >Must have watched a different episode. I saw Paul interrupting Fauci as
> >he tried to explain the reason and the varients that may or may not be
> >protected.
> >
> >Rand Paul just wanted to show off and be a bully.
> I saw Fauci telling us they don't know, over and over again about
> everything.
> Will they ever know enough to say it is 100% safe and will he get away
> from the hysteria before then?

Nothing is 100% safe. My last tetanus booster was not 100% safe.

> At a certain point we need the information to take a calculated risk
> and isn't life just a series of calculated risks anyway?
> We are quickly reaching the point that driving to the restaurant is
> more dangerous than going in, mask or not.
> The question Paul asked is, if your are vaccinated, why aren't you
> safe and it is a good question. If not, why get the shot?

If you are vaccinated, the chance of serious illness or death is much
reduced. It's a calculated risk.

I get my first dose of Moderna today.

Cindy Hamilton

[jimmy]

On 3/19/21 2:53 PM, micky wrote:
> Here's a few more important questiosn they didn't include:
>
> If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to get sick?
>
> Yes.

If I wear two masks, do I still need the FonyFauci-19 vaccine?

[jimmy]

On 3/19/21 3:58 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 3/19/2021 3:39 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>
>>
>> If you can't attack the message, shoot the messenger.
>> Why didn't you tell us what part was wrong?
>> I just saw Fauci tell Rand Paul all of those things the other day on
>> C-Span. (that is live congress TV, not some opinion network).
>>
>
> Must have watched a different episode.  I saw Paul interrupting Fauci as he tried to explain the reason and the varients that may or may not be protected.
>
> Rand Paul just wanted to show off and be a bully.

Rand Paul was just correcting FonyFauci's bullshit.  Calling Rand a "bully" makes you sound like a purple-haired snowflake.

[angelica...@yahoo.com]

Ok, boomer.

Cindy Hamilton

[trader_4]

On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 3:07:37 PM UTC-4, Rod Speed wrote:
> "angelica...@yahoo.com" <angelica...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:aecf03c4-af62-41aa...@googlegroups.com...

> > On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 1:54:17 PM UTC-4, Oliver George wrote:
> >> > https://www.infowars.com/posts/this-information-could-destroy-the-covid-hoax-forever/
> >
> > And you still cannot differentiate a credible source from pure crap.
> >
> >> Here are 12 important questions and answers before considering getting
> >> vaccinated:
> >>
> >>
> >> Q: If I get vaccinated can I stop wearing a mask(s)?
> >>
> >> Government: NO
> >
> > Fine. Wearing a mask is not onerous.
> >
> >> Q: If I get vaccinated will the restaurants, bars, schools, fitness
> >> clubs, hair salons, etc. reopen and will people be able to get back to
> >> work like
> >> normal?
> >>
> >> Government: NO
> >
> > I've been working unvaccinated all year. I'll be happy for everybody
> > at my office to be vacinnated.
> >
> >> Q: If I get vaccinated will I be resistant to Covid?
> >>
> >> Government: Maybe. We don’t know exactly, but probably not.
> >

> > That's wrong. The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
> > Johnson & Johnson, 66%.
> Those are the numbers for avoiding serious disease, not for getting
> infected.

That's wrong. The effectiveness was measured by people being diagnosed
as having Covid, not for having serious disease. If the test subjects came down
with Covid symptoms they were examined by doctors and tested for Covid.
They did not have to present with "serious disease" to be counted, only symptomatic Covid.

[trader_4]

On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 3:39:35 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 18:47:12 +0000, Bod <bodr...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>
> >On 19/03/2021 17:54, Oliver George wrote:
> >>> https://www.infowars.com/posts/this-information-could-destroy-the-covid-hoax-forever/
> >>>
> >>
> >>

> >> Here are 12 important questions and answers before considering getting
> >> vaccinated:
> >>
> >>
> >> Q: If I get vaccinated can I stop wearing a mask(s)?
> >>
> >> Government: NO
> >>
> >>

> >> Q: If I get vaccinated will the restaurants, bars, schools, fitness
> >> clubs, hair salons, etc. reopen and will people be able to get back to
> >> work like normal?
> >>
> >> Government: NO
> >>
> >>

> >> Q: If I get vaccinated will I be resistant to Covid?
> >>
> >> Government: Maybe. We don’t know exactly, but probably not.
> >>
> >>

> >> Q: If I get vaccinated, at least I won’t be contagious to others – right?
> >>
> >> Government: NO. the vaccine doesn’t stop transmission.
> >>
> >>

> >> Q: If I get vaccinated, how long will the vaccine last?
> >>
> >> Government: No one knows. All Covid vaccines are still in the
> >> experimental stage.
> >>
> >>

> >> Q: If I get vaccinated, can I stop social distancing?
> >>
> >> Government: NO
> >>
> >>

> >> Q: If my parents, grandparents and myself all get vaccinated can we hug
> >> each other again?
> >>
> >> Government: NO
> >>
> >>

> >> Q: So what’s the benefit of getting vaccinated?
> >>
> >> Government: Hoping that the virus won’t kill you.
> >>
> >>

> >> Q: Are you sure the vaccine won’t injure or kill me?
> >>
> >> Government: NO
> >>
> >>

> >> Q: If statistically the virus won’t kill me (99.7% survival rate), why
> >> should I get vaccinated?
> >>
> >> Government: To protect others.
> >>
> >>
> >> Q: So if I get vaccinated, I can protect 100% of people I come in
> >> contact with?
> >>
> >> Government: NO
> >>
> >>

> >> Q: If I experience a severe adverse reaction, long-term effects (still
> >> unknown) or die from the vaccine, will I (or my family) be compensated
> >> from the vaccine manufacturer or the Government?
> >>
> >> Government: NO – the government and vaccine manufacturers have zero
> >> liability regarding this experimental drug
> >>
> >>

> >>> https://www.infowars.com/posts/this-information-could-destroy-the-covid-hoax-forever/
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >infowars? A typical misinformation twisting site.
> >Get the vaccine, you fool and read a reliable source for your info.

> If you can't attack the message, shoot the messenger.
> Why didn't you tell us what part was wrong?
> I just saw Fauci tell Rand Paul all of those things the other day on
> C-Span. (that is live congress TV, not some opinion network).

You really are Qanon/Alex Jones nuts. Incredible that you'd ask what's wrong
with all that BS after it's all been explained to you here many times now,
point by point. So listen to Alex Jones, don't get vaccinated, it's worthless.
Don't protect yourself, don't help the rest of humanity by stamping this out
before it mutates more into something far worse. We'll see how that works
out for you. And in the meantime don't claim to us that you're not another
anti-vax nut.

[trader_4]

On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 3:54:49 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 14:53:38 -0400, micky <NONONO...@fmguy.com>
> wrote:
> >In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 19 Mar 2021 13:54:11 -0400, Oliver George
> ><oli...@metronet.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >>> https://www.infowars.com/posts/this-information-could-destroy-the-covid-hoax-forever/
> >
> >
> >Infowars.
> >

> >Here's a few more important questiosn they didn't include:
> >
> >If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to get sick?
> >
> >Yes.
> >

> >If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to need a hospital?
> >
> >Yes.
> >
> >If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to get sent to the Intensive
> >Care Unit?
> >
> >Yes.
> >
> >If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to die?
> >
> >Yes. 100,000 times more likely. Probably a million times.
> >
> >If I don't get vaccinated and I don't die, am I more likely to have new
> >long-term health problems?
> >
> >Yes. As much as a 33% chance of that.
> >
> >If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to make my family and
> >friends sick?
> >
> >Yes.
> >
> >If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to send some of my family
> >and friends to the hospital?
> >
> >Yes. At least the ones too stupid to have gotten vaccinated.
> >
> >If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to send some of my family
> >and friends to the ICU?
> >
> >Yes. At least the ones too stupid to have gotten vaccinated.
> >
> >If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to kill some of my family
> >and friends?
> >
> >Yes. At least the ones too stupid to have gotten vaccinated.
> >
> You missed the point Fauci and his gang said. The vaccine is not
> proven to reduce transmission so you are not protecting others.

That one is worth ripping apart again, it's your typical 1+1 = 7 BS.
Following your faulty logic, because we don't know if a train is coming
today, there is no train coming today. And it's even worse than that
because the scientists have stated many times now that while they
do not have specific data on this, from the experiences with other
vaccines and their knowledge of Covid, they believe it is highly likely
that it does prevent transmission. It's like train experts saying that
based on everything they know they believe it's highly likely that a train
is coming today and you using that to conclude that no train is coming.
You're a never ending fountain of FUD and anti-vax BS.

>
> Cindy just said this about it protecting you.

> "The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
> Johnson & Johnson, 66%."

> Since the survival rate of unvaccinated people is 99.7% or so those
> numbers are somewhat un reassuring.

1 + 1 = 7

Now you're conflating effectiveness with survival rate. Effectiveness is measured
by not having Covid symptoms, not being diagnosed with Covid. The percentage of
vaccinated people who die from Covid is vanishingly small. And IDK where you got
the death rate of people with Covid being 0.3%. The number is more like 2.7% of
the closed cases. There are undiagnosed cases that will bring that down, but
I seriously doubt it's by an order of magnitude. What does Alex Jones tell you?

> I am doing the Pfizer Sunday but mostly because it was free and easy.

So add flaming hypocrite to the list.

> I am not convinced it is going to improve my life much if I still need
> to wear a mask and avoid seeing people according to the government.

> I am only lucky that my state is not run by the Branch Covidian cult
> and we can get out and do things if we want. The results still have us
> in the middle of the pack in spite of a very high median age, lots of
> outsiders coming and going and nothing really closed.
> States like California struggle to explain it and CNN is just
> gobsmacked by it.

Maybe your dumb luck will run out.

[trader_4]

On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 4:17:43 PM UTC-4, micky wrote:
> In alt.home.repair, on Sat, 20 Mar 2021 06:04:26 +1100, "Rod Speed"

> <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >> Q: If I get vaccinated will I be resistant to Covid?
> >
> >> Government: Maybe. We don’t know exactly, but probably not.
> >

> >That last is your bare faced lie. The govt never said that.
> That's for sure. Everyone but liars and dumbbells say that even the
> least good of the vaccines makes one resistant. Not 100%, but
> "resistance" doesn't even imply 100%, so "resistant" is still accurate.

> >
> >> Q: If I get vaccinated, at least I won’t be contagious to others – right?
> >
> >> Government: NO. the vaccine doesn’t stop transmission.

> Government never said that either. At most they said, We don't know.
> Since then there is a lot of evidence for Pfizer that it does.
> >
> >Corse it does if it stops you getting infected.
> Rest omitted. I've spent more time than it's worth arguing with this
> dummy.
>
> What is it that makes some people so stupid? I really don't get it.
> Did they get D's and F's in school? Are they on drugs or liquor? Did
> they go without oxygen in the birth canal? Were they abused as
> children? Do they only watch stupid TV and read stupid websites. I
> know the latter is part of it, but how can they be so stupid they
> discount everything else they read and sometimes they at least read the
> answers they get here.

I would suspect that a lot of it originates with Putin intel ops that create, spread
and amplify the lies and BS to destroy the USA. It doesn't have to be very convincing
to get dummies and whackos to fall for it.

[trader_4]

On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 4:24:11 PM UTC-4, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> gfre...@aol.com writes:
>
> >
> >"The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
> >Johnson & Johnson, 66%."
> >
> >Since the survival rate of unvaccinated people is 99.7% or so those
> >numbers are somewhat un reassuring.

> You are comparing
> apples to oranges. You cannot extrapolate from the
> death rate of those who have so far had the virus to the
> entire population, the majority of which have not contracted
> the virus. So your 99.7% number is meaningless, wrong and dangerous.

+1

AFAIK, the 99.7% number is BS to begin with. Over 2% of those diagnosed with Covid
have died. There are undiagnosed cases that will bring that down, but I think
his 0.3% number is highly suspect and probably came from the usual place.

>
> Note that the survival rate for all vaccines is 100%, as
> even if one does get the virus after vaccination, the symptoms are significantly
> milder, if even detectable.

IDK if it's 100%, but it does appear to be a couple orders of magnitude better
than without being vaccinated. Which of course is fantastic for any reasonable,
intelligent persons. But the nothing would be good enough for the anti-vax,
conspiracy nuts.

[trader_4]

On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 8:20:45 PM UTC-4, Roger Blake wrote:
> On 2021-03-19, micky <NONONO...@fmguy.com> wrote:

> > Here's a few more important questiosn they didn't include:
> >
> > If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to get sick?
> >
> > Yes.

> > ...
>
> An important question for you:
>
> If I take one of these experimental vaccines that have received only
> very limited testing,

The testing was not very limited. They were tested on about 50K people,
went through full phase 3 testing.

>and are approved for emergency use only,

We are in an emergency, with 550K Americans dead, the economy screwed,
you know.

and I
> develop problems from it a year or more from now will YOU accept
> financial liability for that? The vaccine manufacturers are shielded
> from liability, so having held yourself out as a medical expert and
> advised me to take part in this medical experiment, will YOU step up
> to the plate if I am harmed?

I don't see Micky claiming to be a medical expert, only citing what medical
experts have said. If you're suggesting that the govt should have created
a compensation fund specifically for the Covid vaccine, that's probably a
good idea. Why didn't Trump or the big mouth GOP anti-maskers, anti-vaxers
do that, they had 9 months?

[trader_4]

On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 10:53:14 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:58:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:
>
> >On 3/19/2021 3:39 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> If you can't attack the message, shoot the messenger.
> >> Why didn't you tell us what part was wrong?
> >> I just saw Fauci tell Rand Paul all of those things the other day on
> >> C-Span. (that is live congress TV, not some opinion network).
> >>
> >
> >Must have watched a different episode. I saw Paul interrupting Fauci as
> >he tried to explain the reason and the varients that may or may not be
> >protected.
> >
> >Rand Paul just wanted to show off and be a bully.
> I saw Fauci telling us they don't know, over and over again about
> everything.
> Will they ever know enough to say it is 100% safe

Cite for us the drugs that "they" say are 100% safe. Why must that be the
standard in the midst of a pandemic, with 550K dead so far, in just one year?

and will he get away
> from the hysteria before then?

You should be focused on getting away from your hysteria.

> At a certain point we need the information to take a calculated risk
> and isn't life just a series of calculated risks anyway?

We have a lot of good information right now. The sad thing is that there
are a lot of people that won't accept it or worse, totally twist it, misrepresent it,
turn it into FUD. Mostly Trumpets of course. Something like 40% of Republicans
say they won't get the vaccine, more like 50% among people who supported
Trump. That's a very good example why your claim that Trump is gone, he
doesn't matter anymore, there is no damage still with us, etc is baloney.

> We are quickly reaching the point that driving to the restaurant is
> more dangerous than going in, mask or not.
> The question Paul asked is, if your are vaccinated, why aren't you
> safe and it is a good question. If not, why get the shot?

I'm with Jim, what's the point in engaging with you when it's all been explained
to you ten times already, but you still come back, posing the same questions
all over again.

[trader_4]

Did Rand Paul ask that specific question? You know how this works, right? Senators
ask the questions, the person appearing answers them. People appearing also
figure that Senators, especially ones that are doctors, should be at least as well
informed already as the public. When it comes to Rand Paul, I guess that was a
mistake. Either he's willfully ignorant or trying to twist, distort and BS around,
which, IMO, is the more likely problem.

>
> Why are we still running scared even after vaccination?

IDK, because people like you, Alex Jones, Qanon and Rand Paul are spreading FUD?
And who exactly is running scared? I'm not scared.

[trader_4]

+1

Another fine example of what the GOP has become today. I remember when the
jerk was running for president. At one of the debates the issue of what to do about
Iran developing nuclear weapons came up. Rand Paul said it's their right to go ahead
and develop one. By the time he was done answering, it sounded like he thought it
would be a good idea to help them do it or just give them some. He's cuckoo for
cocoa puffs. Must be in the family genes, his father was half nuts too, but this one
is worse.

[trader_4]

On Saturday, March 20, 2021 at 12:24:19 AM UTC-4, Rod Speed wrote:
> <gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message

> > We are quickly reaching the point that driving to the
> > restaurant is more dangerous than going in, mask or not.
> BULLSHIT.

What are the annual deaths from all auto accidents in the US, 40K?
We have 500K dead from Covid in one year, we're adding to that at the
rate of 1K+ per day and Covid is now increasing again in 13 states.

[trader_4]

When you're right, you're right. It was Trump who turned this pandemic into another
nasty, divisive, shit show. Instead of uniting Americans together against an enemy,
he used it for his own partisan, divisive political purposes. He made even a simple mask
a terribly divisive, partisan issue, he dissed them, mocked people wearing them,
refused to wear one, even got himself and those around him infected. He held death
maskless, no social distancing death rallies to try to get re-elected. Fretwell will tell you that
you're suffering from TDS, but the truth is that this is just one great example of the
damage that Trump has inflicted on this country and that it's still ongoing. Sadly Fretwell
is doing the same, misreprenting Covid facts, spreading FUD that puts us further behind
in the battle to save lives and stop Covid.

[trader_4]

I had my second M ten days ago. First shot I had a very sore arm for two days.
Second one, I was expecting it to be worse. Instead I had a minor sore arm for
one day. A friend who's 76 got his, he didn't even have a sore arm.

[Bod]

Have you always talked silly?

[angelica...@yahoo.com]

Good to know. My husband has had his first dose of Pfizer and reported
mild all-over itching with roving areas of more serious itching.

Cindy Hamilton

[micky]

In alt.home.repair, on Sat, 20 Mar 2021 05:32:17 -0700 (PDT), trader_4

<tra...@optonline.net> wrote:

>On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 4:24:11 PM UTC-4, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> gfre...@aol.com writes:
>>
>> >
>> >"The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
>> >Johnson & Johnson, 66%."
>> >
>> >Since the survival rate of unvaccinated people is 99.7% or so those
>> >numbers are somewhat un reassuring.
>> You are comparing
>> apples to oranges. You cannot extrapolate from the
>> death rate of those who have so far had the virus to the
>> entire population, the majority of which have not contracted
>> the virus. So your 99.7% number is meaningless, wrong and dangerous.
>
>+1
>
>AFAIK, the 99.7% number is BS to begin with. Over 2% of those diagnosed with Covid

Yes. I didn't even notice that. All I noticed is that that number and
the other two are mostly unrelated. I guess, because I read Scott's
answer first and he pointed that out.

But, yes, about 2% have died. Compared to the number that die from the
flu which is iirc 0.1%. And compared to the number given, 0.3%, it's
more than 6 times as many as that number.

[micky]

In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 19 Mar 2021 22:58:29 -0400,

gfre...@aol.com wrote:

>On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 20:24:06 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)

>wrote:
>
>>gfre...@aol.com writes:
>>
>>>
>>>"The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
>>>Johnson & Johnson, 66%."
>>>
>>>Since the survival rate of unvaccinated people is 99.7% or so those
>>>numbers are somewhat un reassuring.
>>
>>You are comparing
>>apples to oranges. You cannot extrapolate from the
>>death rate of those who have so far had the virus to the
>>entire population, the majority of which have not contracted
>>the virus. So your 99.7% number is meaningless, wrong and dangerous.
>>

>>Note that the survival rate for all vaccines is 100%, as
>>even if one does get the virus after vaccination, the symptoms are significantly
>>milder, if even detectable.
>

>If Fauci had said that Paul would not have had much more to say
>

>Why are we still running scared even after vaccination?

Because even the best vaccine is only 95% effective and it's still not
known how much vaccinated people (not only don't get symptoms but) don't
get infectious** so they can infect others. There's a lot of evidence
that they resist even getting the infection, but they don't have good
numbers yet, and unless the number was very high, unless 80 or 90% who
don't get infectious, that is still enough to continue to spread the
disease and infect whatever unvaccinated people there are, who risk ICU
and death. And that's the sort of thing public health workers care
about.

There must be web pages that discuss disease transmission of
communicable diseases, which I think is the major aspect of
epidemiology. Reading 5 or 10 screens about that could be
enlightening. There is a lot of arithmetic in it I'm sure.
Multiplication especially.


**I'm using "infectious" because of an earlier misunderstanding we had
here. One of us used "sick" to mean showing symptoms and the other used
the word to also include infected. I think I was the second one and I
never posted an even better example. If someone T has typhoid but no
symptoms, but people can still catch typhoid from T and then die, is T
not sick? I say T is sick, even without symptoms.

But it was also reasonable to use it to mean only people who have
symptoms. That's what the meaning often is, sick meaning showing
symptoms, like vomiting, fever, etc. Without that someone's not sick.

Because these are two meanings of the same word.

[Rod Speed]

"trader_4" <tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:c96b2f07-4e20-498d...@googlegroups.com...

Nope, that’s what the Phase 3 trials measured and that’s
where those numbers came from. They havent measure
the effectiveness of preventing infection by the virus yet,
that measurement is being done now and we don’t have
the numbers yet.

> The effectiveness was measured by people being diagnosed
> as having Covid, not for having serious disease.

Wrong, as always.

> If the test subjects came down with Covid symptoms
> they were examined by doctors and tested for Covid.
> They did not have to present with "serious disease"
> to be counted, only symptomatic Covid.

Wrong, as always. That may well be what your
media has told you, but its just plain wrong.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine#Efficacy
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00075-X/fulltext

[Rod Speed]

"trader_4" <tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message

news:7c0a3f70-1d6d-4fcf...@googlegroups.com...

Nope, he is in fact getting vaccinated.

> Incredible that you'd ask what's wrong with all
> that BS after it's all been explained to you here
> many times now, point by point. So listen to
> Alex Jones, don't get vaccinated, it's worthless.

He is in fact getting vaccinated.

> Don't protect yourself, don't help the rest of humanity by
> stamping this out before it mutates more into something
> far worse. We'll see how that works out for you. And in the
> meantime don't claim to us that you're not another anti-vax nut.

Corse he isnt if he is getting vaccinated.

[Rod Speed]

"trader_4" <tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message

news:6653f25e-e1f0-4462...@googlegroups.com...

More fool you. That doesn’t explain the other nutty stuff like
the claim that the moon landing was faked, that 911 was done
by the US govt so they could control everyone, Area 15 etc etc etc.

> It doesn't have to be very convincing to
> get dummies and whackos to fall for it.

Yes, but it isnt just Putin intel ops doing that.

[Peeler]

On Sun, 21 Mar 2021 03:39:45 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent

Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest trollshit unread>

--

John addressing the senile Australian pest:
"You are a complete idiot. But you make me larf. LOL"
MID: <f9056fe6-1479-40ff...@googlegroups.com>

[Rod Speed]

"trader_4" <tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message

news:b4fc8df2-e85a-498f...@googlegroups.com...

> On Saturday, March 20, 2021 at 12:24:19 AM UTC-4, Rod Speed wrote:
>> <gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
>> > We are quickly reaching the point that driving to the
>> > restaurant is more dangerous than going in, mask or not.

>> BULLSHIT.

> What are the annual deaths from all auto accidents in the US, 40K?

38K, so near enough.

> We have 500K dead from Covid in one year,

That’s not his 'rapidly reaching' tho.

> we're adding to that at the rate of 1K+ per day

And that amounts to at least 350K a year,
so as always he doesn’t have a fucking clue.

[Rod Speed]

"trader_4" <tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message

news:55220f11-96f4-42dd...@googlegroups.com...

That was never going to be possible with this virus
with fools like Muggles, jimmy, fretwell etc around.

> he used it for his own partisan, divisive political purposes. He made
> even a simple mask a terribly divisive, partisan issue, he dissed them,
> mocked people wearing them, refused to wear one, even got himself
> and those around him infected. He held death maskless, no social
> distancing death rallies to try to get re-elected.

But has got vaccinated. Wonder how that happened.

And is telling the trumpets to get vaccinated.

> Fretwell will tell you that you're suffering from TDS,
> but the truth is that this is just one great example of
> the damage that Trump has inflicted on this country
> and that it's still ongoing. Sadly Fretwell is doing the
> same, misreprenting Covid facts, spreading FUD that puts
> us further behind in the battle to save lives and stop Covid.

Nope, because no one listens to him and he is getting vaccinated.

[Rod Speed]

"trader_4" <tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message

news:fab06060-6a22-4053...@googlegroups.com...

> I had my second M ten days ago. First shot I had a very sore arm for two
> days.
> Second one, I was expecting it to be worse. Instead I had a minor sore
> arm for
> one day. A friend who's 76 got his, he didn't even have a sore arm.

Because his immune system isnt as effective as yours. That’s what produces
the sore arm.

[Rod Speed]

"Bod" <bodr...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:vLm5I.114208$ZHb1...@fx41.ams1...

Yep.

[Peeler]

"Rod Speed is an entirely modern phenomenon. Essentially, Rod Speed
is an insecure and worthless individual who has discovered he can
enhance his own self-esteem in his own eyes by playing "the big, hard
man" on the InterNet."

https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/rod-speed-faq.2973853/

--
Richard addressing senile Rodent Speed:
"Shit you're thick/pathetic excuse for a troll."
MID: <ogoa38$pul$1...@news.mixmin.net>

[Rod Speed]

"micky" <NONONO...@fmguy.com> wrote in message
news:a54c5ght1bs5uoj3l...@4ax.com...

> In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 19 Mar 2021 22:58:29 -0400,
> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 20:24:06 GMT, sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>gfre...@aol.com writes:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
>>>>Johnson & Johnson, 66%."
>>>>
>>>>Since the survival rate of unvaccinated people is 99.7% or so those
>>>>numbers are somewhat un reassuring.
>>>
>>>You are comparing
>>>apples to oranges. You cannot extrapolate from the
>>>death rate of those who have so far had the virus to the
>>>entire population, the majority of which have not contracted
>>>the virus. So your 99.7% number is meaningless, wrong and dangerous.
>>>
>>>Note that the survival rate for all vaccines is 100%, as
>>>even if one does get the virus after vaccination, the symptoms are
>>>significantly
>>>milder, if even detectable.
>>
>>If Fauci had said that Paul would not have had much more to say
>>
>>Why are we still running scared even after vaccination?

> Because even the best vaccine is only 95% effective

And that is at preventing severe disease. We don't
yet know how effective they are at preventing
infection tho that is being measured now.

> and it's still not known how much vaccinated people (not only don't
> get symptoms but) don't get infectious** so they can infect others.

And that's even harder to measure.

> There's a lot of evidence that they resist even getting
> the infection, but they don't have good numbers yet,
> and unless the number was very high, unless 80 or 90%
> who don't get infectious, that is still enough to continue
> to spread the disease and infect whatever unvaccinated
> people there are, who risk ICU and death.

And we don't yet know how effective the vaccines are
against the worst of the more virulent strains tho it is
known that the AZ isnt very effective at all against the
south african variant in the RSA.

> And that's the sort of thing public health workers care about.

And what we should all care about except in countrys like
Australia and New Zealand which have the virus well under
control and arent getting any community transmission at
all now. The new cases are all with those entering the country.

> There must be web pages that discuss disease transmission
> of communicable diseases, which I think is the major aspect
> of epidemiology. Reading 5 or 10 screens about that could
> be enlightening.

Not for him, it goes in one ear and straight out the other.

He cant even get the death rate from the virus right, or
even manage to work out that the death rate due to the
virus is still TEN times the death rate due to car accidents.

> There is a lot of arithmetic in it I'm sure.
> Multiplication especially.

Yeah, its surprisingly complicated, particularly when the bulk
of the population has had the disease or has been vaccinated.

> **I'm using "infectious" because of an earlier misunderstanding we had
> here. One of us used "sick" to mean showing symptoms and the other
> used the word to also include infected. I think I was the second one
> and I never posted an even better example. If someone T has typhoid
> but no symptoms, but people can still catch typhoid from T and then
> die, is T not sick? I say T is sick, even without symptoms.

Nope, just infectious.

> But it was also reasonable to use it to mean only people who have
> symptoms. That's what the meaning often is, sick meaning showing
> symptoms, like vomiting, fever, etc. Without that someone's not sick.

> Because these are two meanings of the same word.

Not really. The first one is infectious, not sick.
Typhoid Mary was infectious but not sick.

[Peeler]

On Sun, 21 Mar 2021 04:09:53 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent

Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest trollshit unread>

--

Marland answering senile Rodent's statement, "I don't leak":
"That’s because so much piss and shite emanates from your gob that there is
nothing left to exit normally, your arsehole has clammed shut through disuse
and the end of prick is only clear because you are such a Wanker."
Message-ID: <gm2h57...@mid.individual.net>

[Peeler]

On Sun, 21 Mar 2021 04:11:58 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent

Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

>> Have you always talked silly?
>
> Yep.

He didn't even talk to you! But good to see that you felt personally
addressed and admitted to it, senile bullshit artist.

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 86-year-old senile Australian
cretin's pathological trolling:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/rod-speed-faq.2973853/

[trader_4]

Just like always, just like Trump and Fretwell. Get it wrong and then just
keep doubling down on it. I read the Pfizer trial document that was submitted
to FDA for approval. The effectiveness number was not based on "serious disease".
It was measured on how many of the people who
were vaccinated wound up DIAGNOSED with Covid, regardless of the severity,
compared to the control group. It was ~95% effective in reducing the number
diagnosed with Covid. Further, other studies, eg Israel have confirmed that.
And if the metric is "serious Covid", then the effectiveness is even higher.

> > If the test subjects came down with Covid symptoms
> > they were examined by doctors and tested for Covid.
> > They did not have to present with "serious disease"
> > to be counted, only symptomatic Covid.
> Wrong, as always. That may well be what your
> media has told you, but its just plain wrong.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine#Efficacy
>

Thanks for confirming that you don't know WTF you're talking about. From your
own reference:

"The effectiveness of a new vaccine is defined by its efficacy during clinical trials.[140] The efficacy is the risk of getting the disease by vaccinated participants in the trial compared with the risk of getting the disease by unvaccinated participants.

In efficacy calculations, symptomatic COVID-19 is generally defined as having both a positive PCR test and at least one or two of a defined list of COVID-19 symptoms, although exact specifications varying between trials. "



Exactly what I said. It doesn't say what you said, which is that it's measured by reduction
in "serious cases". Further, if you look at the table, it says for the Moderna vaccine,
if the metric is "serious disease", then the efficacy is close to 100%.

Feel free to man up and admit you got it wrong, or continue to do what the losers do,
lie and deny.

[Peeler]

On Sun, 21 Mar 2021 03:47:10 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent

Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest trollshit unread>

How are things at 03:47 in Australia, you obnoxious, sleepless, trolling
senile asshole?

--
Norman Wells addressing trolling senile Rodent:
"Ah, the voice of scum speaks."
MID: <g4t0jt...@mid.individual.net>

[Jim Joyce]

On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 02:23:12 -0700 (PDT), "angelica...@yahoo.com"
<angelica...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>I get my first dose of Moderna today.

I got my first dose of Moderna last Tuesday. Sore muscle in the area for a
day or two, but very minor. It's now 4 days later and it's fully back to
normal.

[Jim Joyce]

On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 05:51:30 -0700 (PDT), trader_4 <tra...@optonline.net>
wrote:

Don't you ever get tired of eating Greg's lunch? :-)

I have to give him credit where it's due, though. He doesn't mind being
wrong. In fact, he seems to enjoy it.

[Rod Speed]

"trader_4" <tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message

news:c508d222-5595-4389...@googlegroups.com...

We'll see...

> I read the Pfizer trial document that was submitted to FDA for approval.

But clearly didn’t understand it or even what a Phase 3 trial is about.

> The effectiveness number was not based on "serious disease".
> It was measured on how many of the people who
> were vaccinated wound up DIAGNOSED with Covid,
> regardless of the severity, compared to the control group.

Wrong, as always and that document didn’t even say that.

It isnt even possible to diagnose who got covid because
the whole point of a vaccine is to get the body to produce
lots of antibodys so you cant even measure if the individual
has got covid when there are no symptoms.

> It was ~95% effective in reducing the number diagnosed with Covid.

Wrong, as always.

> Further, other studies, eg Israel have confirmed that.

But they arent the ones who produced that 95% number.
And even then, the Israeli data certainly suggest that the
Pfizer vaccine is effective at reducing transmission, but it isnt
possible to put a percentage on how effectively it does that.

It is possible to put a number on the percentage who get severe disease.

> And if the metric is "serious Covid", then the effectiveness is even
> higher.

Wrong, as always.

>>> If the test subjects came down with Covid symptoms
>>> they were examined by doctors and tested for Covid.

Pity about those who never had any symptoms.

>>> They did not have to present with "serious disease"
>>> to be counted, only symptomatic Covid.

Pity about those who never had any symptoms.

>> Wrong, as always. That may well be what your
>> media has told you, but its just plain wrong.
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine#Efficacy

> Thanks for confirming that you don't know WTF you're talking about.

We'll see...

> From your own reference:

> "The effectiveness of a new vaccine is defined by its efficacy
> during clinical trials.[140] The efficacy is the risk of getting the
> disease by vaccinated participants in the trial compared with
> the risk of getting the disease by unvaccinated participants.

That’s a bleeding chunk shorthand from the entire section.

> In efficacy calculations, symptomatic COVID-19 is generally
> defined as having both a positive PCR test and at least one
> or two of a defined list of COVID-19 symptoms, although
> exact specifications varying between trials. "

Pity about those who have no symptoms. Those are clearly infected.

> Exactly what I said.

Wrong, as always.

> It doesn't say what you said, which is that
> it's measured by reduction in "serious cases".

I said serious disease, not serious cases.

> Further, if you look at the table, it says for the Moderna vaccine,
> if the metric is "serious disease", then the efficacy is close to 100%.

But it doesn’t say that the risk of infection is reduced by any percentage.

And you deleted the lancet article because it
blows your stupid claim right out of the water.

<reams of your shit flushed where it belongs>

[micky]

In alt.home.repair, on Sat, 20 Mar 2021 13:05:36 -0500, Jim Joyce

I got Johnson & Johnson 16 days ago. No soreness or anything. I guess
I"m done!

I had bought a box on Entenmann cupcakes. Smaller but also filled and
better than Drakes and better than Hostess, IME (2 or 3 boxes) since
Hostess closed and reopened. I'd eaten 3 of the 8 before it occurred to
me they might be a nice present for the staff there. Individually
wrapped, which I didn't plan but it was good in case anyone was, you
know, germ-conscious. Only one woman turned it down, because she had an
apple, but the 5 others liked it, especially two of them who told me it
was really sweet of me.

[Peeler]

On Sun, 21 Mar 2021 07:01:03 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent

Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest trollshit unread>

[Jim Joyce]

At my facility, all of the workers were National Guard. I thanked some of
them for being there but they gave me a look that said they didn't have a
choice. I should have brought cupcakes.

[gfre...@aol.com]

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 23:22:09 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:

>On 3/19/2021 10:52 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:58:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/19/2021 3:39 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you can't attack the message, shoot the messenger.
>>>> Why didn't you tell us what part was wrong?
>>>> I just saw Fauci tell Rand Paul all of those things the other day on
>>>> C-Span. (that is live congress TV, not some opinion network).
>>>>
>>>
>>> Must have watched a different episode. I saw Paul interrupting Fauci as
>>> he tried to explain the reason and the varients that may or may not be
>>> protected.
>>>
>>> Rand Paul just wanted to show off and be a bully.
>>
>> I saw Fauci telling us they don't know, over and over again about
>> everything.

>> Will they ever know enough to say it is 100% safe and will he get away

>> from the hysteria before then?

>> At a certain point we need the information to take a calculated risk
>> and isn't life just a series of calculated risks anyway?

>> We are quickly reaching the point that driving to the restaurant is
>> more dangerous than going in, mask or not.
>> The question Paul asked is, if your are vaccinated, why aren't you
>> safe and it is a good question. If not, why get the shot?
>>
>

>Every time Fauci tried to explain about the variants Paul cut him off.
>He asked questions but did not want to hear answers, he wanted to make
>his own statement.
>
>https://tinyurl.com/336xnms7
>
>Paul comes across as an arrogant politician that wants to show how smart
>he is.

Paul was asking questions about studies that went against Fauci's
agenda.
Fauci was not responding to the questions asked. He just wanted to
conjecture about variants that have not really been studied.
"I don't know" would be a better answer than simply expanding on worse
case scenarios without actually saying "the vaccine might be worthless
on these strains".
That is what he implied tho.

[gfre...@aol.com]

On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 02:12:03 -0400, micky <NONONO...@fmguy.com>
wrote:

>In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:54:19 -0400,
>gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>
>>>
>>>If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to kill some of my family
>>>and friends?
>>>
>>>Yes. At least the ones too stupid to have gotten vaccinated.
>>>
>>
>>You missed the point Fauci and his gang said. The vaccine is not
>>proven to reduce transmission so you are not protecting others.
>
>You have a pretty obvious mistake here. All you can say is, "The vaccine
>is not proven to reduce transmission so IT IS NOT PROVEN THAT you are
>protecting others." I don't have to explain why this sentence is
>correct, right?
>

Read that in the context of the thread.

>Further, there is quite a bit of evidence from israel that Pfizer does
>reduce transmission, and Moderna is basically the same as Pfizer, so
>that's another mistake.
>

Tell Fauci. He didn't get that memo.

>>Cindy just said this about it protecting you.
>>

>>"The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
>>Johnson & Johnson, 66%."
>>

>>Since the survival rate of unvaccinated people is 99.7% or so those
>>numbers are somewhat un reassuring.
>

>Scott is right. If you're comparing 94.1, 95, and 99.7, you shouldn't
>be. They represent two different things that are independent of each
>other.
>

OK here is another number
"Scientists and researchers are constantly tracking infections and
recoveries. But they have data only on confirmed cases, so they can’t
count people who don’t get COVID-19 tests. Experts also don’t have
information about the outcome of every infection. However, early
estimates predict that the overall COVID-19 recovery rate is between
97% and 99.75%."
https://www.webmd.com/lung/covid-recovery-overview#1

>>I am doing the Pfizer Sunday but mostly because it was free and easy.
>>I am not convinced it is going to improve my life much if I still need
>>to wear a mask and avoid seeing people according to the government.
>
>That's the thing so many people don't appreciate. You're not sick now
>and if you don't get sick in the next 2 years, you probably won't know
>-- I don't know how you could know -- if it's because you didn't meet
>anyone with Corona, you did but you wouldn't have caught it from him
>anyhow, or you would have caught it but the vaccine saved you.

I have been far from a hermit. I am out running around pretty much
like normal for the last year, in an unlocked down state and if I got
it, I was asymptomatic. No I am not running scared like most of you. I
am getting the vaccine because it was easy at CVS, just like I said I
would do months ago when the vaccine was announced.
I was not willing to get in Black Friday lines or be "caller # 47" in
some call in contest.

[gfre...@aol.com]

On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 05:32:17 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
<tra...@optonline.net> wrote:

>On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 4:24:11 PM UTC-4, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> gfre...@aol.com writes:
>>
>> >

>> >"The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
>> >Johnson & Johnson, 66%."
>> >
>> >Since the survival rate of unvaccinated people is 99.7% or so those
>> >numbers are somewhat un reassuring.

>> You are comparing
>> apples to oranges. You cannot extrapolate from the
>> death rate of those who have so far had the virus to the
>> entire population, the majority of which have not contracted
>> the virus. So your 99.7% number is meaningless, wrong and dangerous.
>

>+1
>
>AFAIK, the 99.7% number is BS to begin with. Over 2% of those diagnosed with Covid

>have died. There are undiagnosed cases that will bring that down, but I think
>his 0.3% number is highly suspect and probably came from the usual place.

Yeah that right wing nut job web site WebMd.

https://www.webmd.com/lung/covid-recovery-overview#1

Coronavirus Recovery Rates

[gfre...@aol.com]

On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 05:51:30 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
<tra...@optonline.net> wrote:

>On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 10:53:14 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:

>> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:58:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:
>>
>> >On 3/19/2021 3:39 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> If you can't attack the message, shoot the messenger.
>> >> Why didn't you tell us what part was wrong?
>> >> I just saw Fauci tell Rand Paul all of those things the other day on
>> >> C-Span. (that is live congress TV, not some opinion network).
>> >>
>> >
>> >Must have watched a different episode. I saw Paul interrupting Fauci as
>> >he tried to explain the reason and the varients that may or may not be
>> >protected.
>> >
>> >Rand Paul just wanted to show off and be a bully.
>> I saw Fauci telling us they don't know, over and over again about
>> everything.
>> Will they ever know enough to say it is 100% safe
>

>Cite for us the drugs that "they" say are 100% safe. Why must that be the
>standard in the midst of a pandemic, with 550K dead so far, in just one year?
>
>

Fauci seems to be the one shooting for 100% safe. Some of us are
willing to take a calculated risk.
I said before, your chance of being killed in your car is higher
driving to a restaurant than it is from covid you might get there.

[gfre...@aol.com]

On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 06:06:54 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
<tra...@optonline.net> wrote:

>On Saturday, March 20, 2021 at 12:24:19 AM UTC-4, Rod Speed wrote:
>> <gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
>

>> > We are quickly reaching the point that driving to the
>> > restaurant is more dangerous than going in, mask or not.

>> BULLSHIT.
>
>What are the annual deaths from all auto accidents in the US, 40K?

>We have 500K dead from Covid in one year, we're adding to that at the
>rate of 1K+ per day and Covid is now increasing again in 13 states.
>
Look at who died and lets reframe the question.
95% of the covid deaths involved people, mostly old people with
serious co morbidities. A good percentage of them were in nursing
homes, not out on the road.
If you are a reasonably healthy person and you drive to a restaurant
that is using any decent health and safety protocol, which is more
dangerous?

I also notice that some of the states with the worst resurgence of
cases are still locked down. Michigan is a good start on that but New
Jersey is running pretty tight too. Hawaii is even harder to explain.
The worst states reported tonight on NBC were Maine, New Hampshire,
New Jersey, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota and Idaho.


I do expect we might see more cases here but with so many people from
those hot spots coming here it is not surprising.

[Rod Speed]

<gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:2f5d5g5qn3u8dtsra...@4ax.com...

Wrong, as always. He was mindlessly rabitting on about
what is irrelevant to the points that Fauci was making.

> Fauci was not responding to the questions asked.

Another bare faced lie. He was in fact pointing
out that the questions that Paul was endlessly
rabitting on about are irrelevant.

> He just wanted to conjecture about variants

Another bare faced lie. He was in fact rubbing Paul's stupid
nose in the fact that the more virulent variants made Paul's
stupid question that he kept repeating irrelevant.

> that have not really been studied.

Another bare faced lie.

> "I don't know" would be a better answer

In fact he said we don't know, repeatedly.

> than simply expanding on worse case scenarios
> without actually saying "the vaccine might be
> worthless on these strains".

Its very unlikely indeed that the vaccines are
worthless against the new more virulent variants.

> That is what he implied tho.

Another bare faced lie. In fact he said that that is
why we need to keep wearing masks until its clear
how effective the vaccines are against the new more
virulent variants. And he said that very clearly indeed.

[Rod Speed]

<gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:qq5d5glcm9dva5e10...@4ax.com...

> On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 02:12:03 -0400, micky <NONONO...@fmguy.com>
> wrote:
>
>>In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:54:19 -0400,
>>gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to kill some of my family
>>>>and friends?
>>>>
>>>>Yes. At least the ones too stupid to have gotten vaccinated.
>>>>
>>>
>>>You missed the point Fauci and his gang said. The vaccine is not
>>>proven to reduce transmission so you are not protecting others.
>>
>>You have a pretty obvious mistake here. All you can say is, "The vaccine
>>is not proven to reduce transmission so IT IS NOT PROVEN THAT you are
>>protecting others." I don't have to explain why this sentence is
>>correct, right?
>>
>
> Read that in the context of the thread.

More mindless bullshit.

>> Further, there is quite a bit of evidence from israel
>> that Pfizer does reduce transmission, and Moderna
>> is basically the same as Pfizer, so that's another mistake.

> Tell Fauci. He didn't get that memo.

Another bare faced lie and irrelevant to Fauci's point
that we don’t yet know how effective those vaccines
are against the new more virulent variants because
Israel hasn’t see a lot of those yet.

>>>Cindy just said this about it protecting you.
>>>
>>>"The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
>>>Johnson & Johnson, 66%."
>>>
>>>Since the survival rate of unvaccinated people is 99.7% or so those
>>>numbers are somewhat un reassuring.
>>
>>Scott is right. If you're comparing 94.1, 95, and 99.7, you shouldn't
>>be. They represent two different things that are independent of each
>>other.

> OK here is another number
> "Scientists and researchers are constantly tracking infections and
> recoveries. But they have data only on confirmed cases, so they can’t
> count people who don’t get COVID-19 tests. Experts also don’t have
> information about the outcome of every infection. However, early
> estimates predict that the overall COVID-19 recovery rate is between
> 97% and 99.75%."

But the number of deaths due to the virus
alone are nothing like that last number so
its obviously nothing like the recovery rate.

> https://www.webmd.com/lung/covid-recovery-overview#1

>>>I am doing the Pfizer Sunday but mostly because it was free and easy.
>>>I am not convinced it is going to improve my life much if I still need
>>>to wear a mask and avoid seeing people according to the government.
>>
>>That's the thing so many people don't appreciate. You're not sick now
>>and if you don't get sick in the next 2 years, you probably won't know
>>-- I don't know how you could know -- if it's because you didn't meet
>>anyone with Corona, you did but you wouldn't have caught it from him
>>anyhow, or you would have caught it but the vaccine saved you.

> I have been far from a hermit. I am out running around pretty
> much like normal for the last year, in an unlocked down state

Yes, you actually are that stupid. And the reason you didn’t get it
is because you didn’t do much of the most high risk activity like
associating with lots of people who werent your wife indoors.

> and if I got it, I was asymptomatic. No I
> am not running scared like most of you.

None of us are running scared. Some of us are taking sensible precautions.

A few fools like Muggles and you are taking no precautions.

[Rod Speed]

<gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:7m7d5glrrsa7r0r68...@4ax.com...

> On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 05:32:17 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
> <tra...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 4:24:11 PM UTC-4, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>> gfre...@aol.com writes:
>>>
>>> >
>>> >"The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
>>> >Johnson & Johnson, 66%."
>>> >
>>> >Since the survival rate of unvaccinated people is 99.7% or so those
>>> >numbers are somewhat un reassuring.
>>> You are comparing
>>> apples to oranges. You cannot extrapolate from the
>>> death rate of those who have so far had the virus to the
>>> entire population, the majority of which have not contracted
>>> the virus. So your 99.7% number is meaningless, wrong and dangerous.
>>
>>+1
>>
>>AFAIK, the 99.7% number is BS to begin with. Over 2% of those diagnosed
>>with Covid
>>have died. There are undiagnosed cases that will bring that down, but I
>>think
>>his 0.3% number is highly suspect and probably came from the usual place.

> Yeah that right wing nut job web site WebMd.

That doesn’t say that the 99.7% rate is the right
one you pathetic excuse for a bullshit artist.

[Rod Speed]

<gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:8r7d5gl5gjf4m1ofo...@4ax.com...

> On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 05:51:30 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
> <tra...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 10:53:14 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:58:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On 3/19/2021 3:39 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> If you can't attack the message, shoot the messenger.
>>> >> Why didn't you tell us what part was wrong?
>>> >> I just saw Fauci tell Rand Paul all of those things the other day on
>>> >> C-Span. (that is live congress TV, not some opinion network).
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >Must have watched a different episode. I saw Paul interrupting Fauci as
>>> >he tried to explain the reason and the varients that may or may not be
>>> >protected.
>>> >
>>> >Rand Paul just wanted to show off and be a bully.
>>> I saw Fauci telling us they don't know, over and over again about
>>> everything.
>>> Will they ever know enough to say it is 100% safe
>>
>>Cite for us the drugs that "they" say are 100% safe. Why must that be
>>the
>>standard in the midst of a pandemic, with 550K dead so far, in just one
>>year?

> Fauci seems to be the one shooting for 100% safe.

More of your bare faced lies. He has never done anything of the sort.

> Some of us are willing to take a calculated risk.

Nothing calculated about the risk fools like you and muggles take.

> I said before, your chance of being killed in your car is higher
> driving to a restaurant than it is from covid you might get there.

Another bare faced lie. The risk of being killed by this virus is
in fact TEN times higher and you also at much more risk of
getting very serious and unpleasant disease and recovering
with an even higher risk of long covid.

[Rod Speed]

<gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:j08d5gpet22b9tbbg...@4ax.com...

> On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 06:06:54 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
> <tra...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>On Saturday, March 20, 2021 at 12:24:19 AM UTC-4, Rod Speed wrote:
>>> <gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
>>
>>> > We are quickly reaching the point that driving to the
>>> > restaurant is more dangerous than going in, mask or not.
>>> BULLSHIT.
>>
>>What are the annual deaths from all auto accidents in the US, 40K?
>>We have 500K dead from Covid in one year, we're adding to that at the
>>rate of 1K+ per day and Covid is now increasing again in 13 states.

> Look at who died and lets reframe the question.

No thanks.

> 95% of the covid deaths involved people, mostly old people

Yes.

> with serious co morbidities.

Another bare faced lie. In fact its JUST co morbiditys
that most old people have, not serious co morbiditys.

> A good percentage of them were in
> nursing homes, not out on the road.

But plenty of them arent in fact in nursing homes.
The reason so many die in nursing homes is because
this virus spreads like wildfire inside any building
with lots of people in it all the time.

> If you are a reasonably healthy person and you drive
> to a restaurant that is using any decent health and
> safety protocol, which is more dangerous?

The virus. And its not just death that matters either.

> I also notice that some of the states with the
> worst resurgence of cases are still locked down.

They are still locked down BECAUSE they
have the worst emergence of cases, fuckwit.

> Michigan is a good start on that but New Jersey is
> running pretty tight too. Hawaii is even harder to explain.

Nope, how the virus spreads is very dependant on lifestyle.

[Clare Snyder]

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 13:54:11 -0400, Oliver George
<oli...@metronet.invalid> wrote:

>> https://www.infowars.com/posts/this-information-could-destroy-the-covid-hoax-forever/
>
>

>Here are 12 important questions and answers before considering getting vaccinated:
>
>
>Q: If I get vaccinated can I stop wearing a mask(s)?
>
>Government: NO

>Eventually yes

>
>Q: If I get vaccinated will the restaurants, bars, schools, fitness clubs, hair salons, etc. reopen and will people be able to get back to work like
>normal?
>
>Government: NO

Enentually

>
>
>Q: If I get vaccinated will I be resistant to Covid?
>
>Government: Maybe. We don’t know exactly, but probably not.

Actually you will be "resistant" - not 100% protected - but IF you get
it it will not be as serious
>
>
>Q: If I get vaccinated, at least I won’t be contagious to others – right?
>
>Government: NO. the vaccine doesn’t stop transmission.
Acdtually it reduces the multiplication of the virus - it will not
PREVENT transmission but it will significantly reduce it
>
>
>Q: If I get vaccinated, how long will the vaccine last?
>
>Government: No one knows. All Covid vaccines are still in the experimental stage.
>
It will LIKELY be several years - but you may require boosters every
so often - but it MAY be lifelong. That is the hope -
>
>Q: If I get vaccinated, can I stop social distancing?
>
>Government: NO
Eventually we will ALL be able - but the more quickly everyone is
vaccinated the quicker that "eventually" will be - on all counts.
>
>
>Q: If my parents, grandparents and myself all get vaccinated can we hug each other again?
>
>Government: NO

Forget the government - what foes SCIENCE say? By getting the
majority vaccinated as soon as possible the virus will be knocked back
to the point we WILL be able to get back to "normal" - eventually. You
are likely not old enough to have lived through the Polio "pandemic"
of the late 40's and fifties. It was ONLY because of Vaccinations that
we are not still "socially distancing" to prevent Polio. Same with
Tuberculosis and smallpox. TB vaccine and smallpox vaccine did not
TOTALLY stop transmission or ive TOTAL immunity - but by reducing the
efficiency of spread, and reducing the chance of catching it it
VIRTUALLY eliminated both Smallpox, TB and Polio
>
>
>Q: So what’s the benefit of getting vaccinated?
>
>Government: Hoping that the virus won’t kill you.
>
>
>Q: Are you sure the vaccine won’t injure or kill me?
>
>Government: NO
>
>
>Q: If statistically the virus won’t kill me (99.7% survival rate), why should I get vaccinated?
>
>Government: To protect others.
>
>
>Q: So if I get vaccinated, I can protect 100% of people I come in contact with?
>
>Government: NO
>
>
>Q: If I experience a severe adverse reaction, long-term effects (still unknown) or die from the vaccine, will I (or my family) be compensated from
>the vaccine manufacturer or the Government?
>
>Government: NO – the government and vaccine manufacturers have zero liability regarding this experimental drug
>
>
>> https://www.infowars.com/posts/this-information-could-destroy-the-covid-hoax-forever/
>
Infowars is at war with information and the truth.

With the Astro Zenica virus even IF the .000001% or whatever that got
blood clots WERE from the vaccine, and only minority of unvaccinated
actually get infected, the danger of a blood clot from Covid is still
SIGNIFICANTLY higher than getting it from the vaccine.

[Clare Snyder]

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 23:22:09 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:

>On 3/19/2021 10:52 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:

>> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:58:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/19/2021 3:39 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you can't attack the message, shoot the messenger.
>>>> Why didn't you tell us what part was wrong?
>>>> I just saw Fauci tell Rand Paul all of those things the other day on
>>>> C-Span. (that is live congress TV, not some opinion network).
>>>>
>>>
>>> Must have watched a different episode. I saw Paul interrupting Fauci as
>>> he tried to explain the reason and the varients that may or may not be
>>> protected.
>>>
>>> Rand Paul just wanted to show off and be a bully.
>>
>> I saw Fauci telling us they don't know, over and over again about
>> everything.

>> Will they ever know enough to say it is 100% safe and will he get away
>> from the hysteria before then?
>> At a certain point we need the information to take a calculated risk
>> and isn't life just a series of calculated risks anyway?

>> We are quickly reaching the point that driving to the restaurant is
>> more dangerous than going in, mask or not.

>> The question Paul asked is, if your are vaccinated, why aren't you
>> safe and it is a good question. If not, why get the shot?
>>
>
>Every time Fauci tried to explain about the variants Paul cut him off.
>He asked questions but did not want to hear answers, he wanted to make
>his own statement.
>
>https://tinyurl.com/336xnms7
>
>Paul comes across as an arrogant politician that wants to show how smart
>he is.

And all he does is show how ignorant he is

[Clare Snyder]

On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 05:28:40 -0400, jimmy <ji...@invalid.invalid>

wrote:

>On 3/19/21 2:53 PM, micky wrote:
>> Here's a few more important questiosn they didn't include:
>>
>> If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to get sick?
>>
>> Yes.
>
>
>If I wear two masks, do I still need the FonyFauci-19 vaccine?

If you wear your necktie too tight you won't need the vaccine OR
catch the virus - but you'll still be dead - - -

[micky]

In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 19 Mar 2021 20:59:01 -0400, Ed Pawlowski
<e...@snet.xxx> wrote:

>On 3/19/2021 8:51 PM, Bob F wrote:

>> On 3/19/2021 11:51 AM, angelica...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 1:54:17 PM UTC-4, Oliver George wrote:
>>>>> https://www.infowars.com/posts/this-information-could-destroy-the-covid-hoax-forever/
>>>>>
>>>
>>> And you still cannot differentiate a credible source from pure crap.
>>>

>>>> Here are 12 important questions and answers before considering
>>>> getting vaccinated:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Q: If I get vaccinated can I stop wearing a mask(s)?
>>>>
>>>> Government: NO
>>>

>>> Fine.  Wearing a mask is not onerous.
>>>

>>>> Q: If I get vaccinated will the restaurants, bars, schools, fitness
>>>> clubs, hair salons, etc. reopen and will people be able to get back
>>>> to work like
>>>> normal?
>>>>
>>>> Government: NO
>>>

>>> I've been working unvaccinated all year.  I'll be happy for everybody
>>> at my office to be vacinnated.
>>>

>>>> Q: If I get vaccinated will I be resistant to Covid?
>>>>
>>>> Government: Maybe. We don’t know exactly, but probably not.
>>>

>>> That's wrong.  The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
>>> Johnson & Johnson, 66%.
>>>

>>>> Q: If I get vaccinated, at least I won’t be contagious to others –
>>>> right?
>>>>
>>>> Government: NO. the vaccine doesn’t stop transmission.
>>>

>>> It reduces transmission.

>>>
>>>> Q: If I get vaccinated, how long will the vaccine last?
>>>>
>>>> Government: No one knows. All Covid vaccines are still in the
>>>> experimental stage.
>>>

>>> Which is true of every new vaccine.

>>>
>>>> Q: If I get vaccinated, can I stop social distancing?
>>>>
>>>> Government: NO
>>>

>>> Who cares?  I don't want to get close to anybody but my husband.

>>>
>>>> Q: If my parents, grandparents and myself all get vaccinated can we
>>>> hug each other again?
>>>>
>>>> Government: NO
>>>

>>> Another big slug of indifference.

>>>> Q: So what’s the benefit of getting vaccinated?
>>>>
>>>> Government: Hoping that the virus won’t kill you.
>>>

>>> So if you contract COVID-19, it won't be as severe, and you won't
>>> be as infectious.

>>>
>>>> Q: Are you sure the vaccine won’t injure or kill me?
>>>>
>>>> Government: NO
>>>

>>> Any vaccine has that possibility.  Yet we all got the smallpox vaccine
>>> and others.

>>>
>>>> Q: If statistically the virus won’t kill me (99.7% survival rate),
>>>> why should I get vaccinated?
>>>>
>>>> Government: To protect others.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Q: So if I get vaccinated, I can protect 100% of people I come in
>>>> contact with?
>>>>
>>>> Government: NO
>>>

>>> Nothing is 100%.

>>>
>>>> Q: If I experience a severe adverse reaction, long-term effects
>>>> (still unknown) or die from the vaccine, will I (or my family) be
>>>> compensated from
>>>> the vaccine manufacturer or the Government?
>>>>
>>>> Government: NO – the government and vaccine manufacturers have zero
>>>> liability regarding this experimental drug
>>>

>>> Just like any other vaccine administered to millions of people
>>> every single year.
>>>
>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>
>>
>>
>> Actually, they are all close to 100% effective on avoiding
>> hospitalization or death.

You know, I think not sure, that sometimes they say hospitalization, but
other times they just say ICU.
>>
>
>Yes, an important consideration. People have been in the hospital and
>on ventilators for long periods so just eliminating that is a big factor.

Guy on the radio today, 35 years old, in good health before this I
think, spent 6 months in the hospital with covid, and finally got a
double lung transplant. Now he's starting to feel much better.

[Peeler]

On Sun, 21 Mar 2021 12:49:08 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent

Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<senile cretin's bare-faced trolling flushed again>

[Peeler]

On Sun, 21 Mar 2021 13:02:16 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent

Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest trollshit unread>

--

Sqwertz to Rodent Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID: <ev1p6ml7ywd5$.d...@sqwertz.com>

[jimmy]

Rand Paul is just following the science.

If a snowflake can't handle the truth, they should "circle back" to their safe space until the "crisis" is over.

[trader_4]

On Saturday, March 20, 2021 at 1:11:38 PM UTC-4, Rod Speed wrote:
> "trader_4" <tra...@optonline.net> wrote in message

> news:fab06060-6a22-4053...@googlegroups.com...
> > On Saturday, March 20, 2021 at 5:23:15 AM UTC-4, angelica...@yahoo.com
> > wrote:

> >> On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 10:53:14 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
> >> > On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:58:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >On 3/19/2021 3:39 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >>
> >> > >> If you can't attack the message, shoot the messenger.
> >> > >> Why didn't you tell us what part was wrong?
> >> > >> I just saw Fauci tell Rand Paul all of those things the other day on
> >> > >> C-Span. (that is live congress TV, not some opinion network).
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > >Must have watched a different episode. I saw Paul interrupting Fauci
> >> > >as
> >> > >he tried to explain the reason and the varients that may or may not be
> >> > >protected.
> >> > >
> >> > >Rand Paul just wanted to show off and be a bully.
> >> > I saw Fauci telling us they don't know, over and over again about
> >> > everything.
> >> > Will they ever know enough to say it is 100% safe and will he get away
> >> > from the hysteria before then?

> >> Nothing is 100% safe. My last tetanus booster was not 100% safe.

> >> > At a certain point we need the information to take a calculated risk
> >> > and isn't life just a series of calculated risks anyway?
> >> > We are quickly reaching the point that driving to the restaurant is
> >> > more dangerous than going in, mask or not.
> >> > The question Paul asked is, if your are vaccinated, why aren't you
> >> > safe and it is a good question. If not, why get the shot?

> >> If you are vaccinated, the chance of serious illness or death is much
> >> reduced. It's a calculated risk.

> >>
> >> I get my first dose of Moderna today.

> > I had my second M ten days ago. First shot I had a very sore arm for two
> > days.
> > Second one, I was expecting it to be worse. Instead I had a minor sore
> > arm for
> > one day. A friend who's 76 got his, he didn't even have a sore arm.
> Because his immune system isnt as effective as yours. That’s what produces
> the sore arm.

That's wrong too, stupid. Vaccine scientists have said that there is no correlation
between the severity of any reaction and the protection that results.

[trader_4]

That's obviously wrong too, stupid. It's like saying we can't diagnose
someone having Measles either, if they've been vaccinated. Following
that logic, it would be impossible to know if any vaccine is effective,
because we can't tell who has it and who does not. But we can because
we have DNA based tests that test for the presence of the actual virus,
not antibodies, stupid.

> > It was ~95% effective in reducing the number diagnosed with Covid.
> Wrong, as always.

No, that's exactly what you're own reference, wiki says, stupid.

> > Further, other studies, eg Israel have confirmed that.
> But they arent the ones who produced that 95% number.

They confirmed it stupid and it's the reduction in Covid diagnosis in
the people vaccinated versus those that were not. It's not the
reduction in those with "serious cases", stupid.

> And even then, the Israeli data certainly suggest that the
> Pfizer vaccine is effective at reducing transmission, but it isnt
> possible to put a percentage on how effectively it does that.

Just like usual, instead of just admitting you were wrong, now you're
babbling about something else, trying to divert.

>
> It is possible to put a number on the percentage who get severe disease.
> > And if the metric is "serious Covid", then the effectiveness is even
> > higher.
> Wrong, as always.

All the vaccine scientists and medical pros say otherwise, stupid.

> >>> If the test subjects came down with Covid symptoms
> >>> they were examined by doctors and tested for Covid.
> Pity about those who never had any symptoms.

Irrelevant to what you got wrong, stupid.

> >>> They did not have to present with "serious disease"
> >>> to be counted, only symptomatic Covid.
> Pity about those who never had any symptoms.
> >> Wrong, as always. That may well be what your
> >> media has told you, but its just plain wrong.
> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine#Efficacy
>
> > Thanks for confirming that you don't know WTF you're talking about.
> We'll see...

We just did see, even your own reference says it.

> > From your own reference:
>
> > "The effectiveness of a new vaccine is defined by its efficacy
> > during clinical trials.[140] The efficacy is the risk of getting the
> > disease by vaccinated participants in the trial compared with
> > the risk of getting the disease by unvaccinated participants.
> That’s a bleeding chunk shorthand from the entire section.
> > In efficacy calculations, symptomatic COVID-19 is generally
> > defined as having both a positive PCR test and at least one
> > or two of a defined list of COVID-19 symptoms, although
> > exact specifications varying between trials. "
> Pity about those who have no symptoms. Those are clearly infected.

Irrelevant to the fact that the 95% efficacy was measured as the
reduction in people diagnosed with Covid compared to the placebo
group, not the reduction is serious disease which is what you claimed.

>
> > Exactly what I said.
>
> Wrong, as always.
> > It doesn't say what you said, which is that
> > it's measured by reduction in "serious cases".
> I said serious disease, not serious cases.
> > Further, if you look at the table, it says for the Moderna vaccine,
> > if the metric is "serious disease", then the efficacy is close to 100%.
> But it doesn’t say that the risk of infection is reduced by any percentage.
>
> And you deleted the lancet article because it
> blows your stupid claim right out of the water.
>
> <reams of your shit flushed where it belongs>

I didn't bother with the second of your references, because the first clearly
said you're wrong, it didn't say what you claimed, that the vaccine efficacy is
measure by reduction is severe cases. It says exactly what I said, that it's
a measure of reduction of Covid infections diagnosed PERIOD. OK, so now
I go look at the Lancet and what does it say? Exactly the same thing, that
it's measured as reduction in SYMPTOMATIC cases, not your "severe cases".

"It is imperative to dispel any ambiguity about how vaccine efficacy shown in trials translates into protecting individuals and populations. The mRNA-based Pfizer1
, 2
and Moderna3
vaccines were shown to have 94–95% efficacy in preventing symptomatic COVID-19, calculated as 100 × (1 minus the attack rate with vaccine divided by the attack rate with placebo). It means that in a population such as the one enrolled in the trials, with a cumulated COVID-19 attack rate over a period of 3 months of about 1% without a vaccine, we would expect roughly 0·05% of vaccinated people would get diseased. "

Feel better now? Continue to now lie and double down on stupid, instead of
admitting you were wrong. Just like Trump.

[trader_4]

On Saturday, March 20, 2021 at 8:58:00 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 02:12:03 -0400, micky <NONONO...@fmguy.com>
> wrote:
> >In alt.home.repair, on Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:54:19 -0400,
> >gfre...@aol.com wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>>If I don't get vaccinated, am I more likely to kill some of my family
> >>>and friends?
> >>>
> >>>Yes. At least the ones too stupid to have gotten vaccinated.
> >>>
> >>
> >>You missed the point Fauci and his gang said. The vaccine is not
> >>proven to reduce transmission so you are not protecting others.
> >
> >You have a pretty obvious mistake here. All you can say is, "The vaccine
> >is not proven to reduce transmission so IT IS NOT PROVEN THAT you are
> >protecting others." I don't have to explain why this sentence is
> >correct, right?
> >
> Read that in the context of the thread.

We did and what you've been posting is still wrong, very wrong. Micky is right.

> >Further, there is quite a bit of evidence from israel that Pfizer does
> >reduce transmission, and Moderna is basically the same as Pfizer, so
> >that's another mistake.
> >
> Tell Fauci. He didn't get that memo.

I didn't see the relevant exchange. But given your track record with 1+1 = 7
I can guess what could have happened. And Fauci is trying to guide a country,
he's not going to rush to change national policy based on one study.
Especially when for most purposes, it doesn't matter right now. You expect
Fauci to say, well, if you've been vaccinated, based on what we see now
from the Israel study, you don't need to wear a mask. It doesn't take much
thought to figure out what would happen then. There are already 40% of
the population that wouldn't have been wearing masks from the beginning,
regardless of vaccines. They are Covid deniers. So if Fauci gave the green
light, Walmart and similar would be swamped with morons showing up
wearing no masks, claiming they have been vaccinated and demanding to
be let in. And Fauci, like the rest of the sane folks, know it's just a simple
mask.

It's really something. Trump for months spewed one false statement, one lie
after another about Covid. He turned to govt officials and asked them to start
investigating cleansing people's lungs with bleach. He held death rallies, no
masks, no social distancing. Not a peep about any of that. But Fauci, your
all over him with criticism, like white on rice.

> >>Cindy just said this about it protecting you.
> >>
> >>"The effectiveness of the Moderna is 94.1%; Pfizer, 95%,
> >>Johnson & Johnson, 66%."
> >>
> >>Since the survival rate of unvaccinated people is 99.7% or so those
> >>numbers are somewhat un reassuring.
> >
> >Scott is right. If you're comparing 94.1, 95, and 99.7, you shouldn't
> >be. They represent two different things that are independent of each
> >other.
> >
> OK here is another number
> "Scientists and researchers are constantly tracking infections and
> recoveries. But they have data only on confirmed cases, so they can’t
> count people who don’t get COVID-19 tests. Experts also don’t have
> information about the outcome of every infection. However, early
> estimates predict that the overall COVID-19 recovery rate is between
> 97% and 99.75%."
> https://www.webmd.com/lung/covid-recovery-overview#1

Funny, you told us yesterday that the Covid death rate was just 0.3%
Now apparently it's 0.25% to as high as 3%.

> >>I am doing the Pfizer Sunday but mostly because it was free and easy.
> >>I am not convinced it is going to improve my life much if I still need
> >>to wear a mask and avoid seeing people according to the government.
> >
> >That's the thing so many people don't appreciate. You're not sick now
> >and if you don't get sick in the next 2 years, you probably won't know
> >-- I don't know how you could know -- if it's because you didn't meet
> >anyone with Corona, you did but you wouldn't have caught it from him
> >anyhow, or you would have caught it but the vaccine saved you.
> I have been far from a hermit. I am out running around pretty much
> like normal for the last year, in an unlocked down state and if I got
> it, I was asymptomatic. No I am not running scared like most of you. I
> am getting the vaccine because it was easy at CVS, just like I said I
> would do months ago when the vaccine was announced.
> I was not willing to get in Black Friday lines or be "caller # 47" in
> some call in contest.

Based on all that you've posted I really don't understand why you're getting the vaccine.

[trader_4]

At least you're consistent. You just take a part of what someone states, then
twist it into whatever you would like it to have been. The classic example is
experts and officials have said repeatedly that they don't know if the vaccines
prevent transmission *yet*, but that based on other vaccines and science, they
*believe* that they will prevent transmission. You take that and turn it into
asking what good is the vaccine, when they say it won't prevent transmission.
Here, your own reference says that 0.25% to 3% of people infected with Covid
die, you turn that into 0.3% die. Another glaring problem with the WebMD
source is that they say "early data" and it's undated, suggesting it's old. But
note that I've said from the beginning that Covid isn't the flu, it's an order of
magnitude more deadly. That would put it in the middle of the WebMD range.
So, what was your point here again?

[trader_4]

On Saturday, March 20, 2021 at 9:23:35 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 05:51:30 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
> <tra...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> >On Friday, March 19, 2021 at 10:53:14 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
> >> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 15:58:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.xxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On 3/19/2021 3:39 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> If you can't attack the message, shoot the messenger.
> >> >> Why didn't you tell us what part was wrong?
> >> >> I just saw Fauci tell Rand Paul all of those things the other day on
> >> >> C-Span. (that is live congress TV, not some opinion network).
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Must have watched a different episode. I saw Paul interrupting Fauci as
> >> >he tried to explain the reason and the varients that may or may not be
> >> >protected.
> >> >
> >> >Rand Paul just wanted to show off and be a bully.
> >> I saw Fauci telling us they don't know, over and over again about
> >> everything.
> >> Will they ever know enough to say it is 100% safe
> >
> >Cite for us the drugs that "they" say are 100% safe. Why must that be the
> >standard in the midst of a pandemic, with 550K dead so far, in just one year?
> >
> >
> Fauci seems to be the one shooting for 100% safe.

Failed attempt at diversion to the wilderness.

Some of us are
> willing to take a calculated risk.
> I said before, your chance of being killed in your car is higher
> driving to a restaurant than it is from covid you might get there.

Right. 40K deaths a year in all auto accidents, 500K from Covid. Got it.
Have you gone off your meds or something?