There have already been more COVID deaths this year in the U.S than in all of 2020

[54212 432]

13 minutes ago, Hot Sauce said:

 

It's not a matter of data being hard to read, it's a matter of ignoring an obvious flaw in the logic. 

 

How did I ignore it? By not denouncing Cooke? 

 

[Cooke 2,026]

You know even the WHO says vaccines are not the way out of this. Its vaccines AND other things. in the west we have become so hyper focused on one thing. 

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/21/who-warns-a-coronavirus-vaccine-alone-will-not-end-pandemic.html

 

we need vaccines yes, but also we need to work on the route causes of why people actually die when infected with covid. Even with Vaccines, unhealthy people are dying with covid in large numbers. Is obesity a taboo subject with Americans? Yall can get fat as fuck and take a vaccine and think you're good but really you're not. Its all about FEELING safe rather than actually being safe.  You know where people aren't dying from Covid? Africa.  If a pandemic was going to cause great devastation somewhere it should be there but they aren't fat asses. Instead the death per capitas are highest in the highest GDP countries. 

Edited November 23, 2021 by Cooke

[Hot Sauce 2,727]

11 minutes ago, Saucer said:

 

How did I ignore it? By not denouncing Cooke? 

 

 

I'm not saying you ignored anything, I'm saying Cooke ignored a pretty obvious flaw in his comparison and that the 'data is hard to read' isn't a good excuse for him since this really isn't a case where that applies. There's new studies, conflicting studies, studies that haven't been peer reviewed and get propped up by one side or the other but end up getting torn apart during peer review, CDC/WHO giving conflicting information, etc., so I don't disagree that the data is hard to read, but not using pre-vaccine deaths to compare states as evidence of vaccine efficacy isn't one of those situations lol.

[Mr. Impossible 407]

2 hours ago, Hot Sauce said:

 

I'm not saying you ignored anything, I'm saying Cooke ignored a pretty obvious flaw in his comparison and that the 'data is hard to read' isn't a good excuse for him since this really isn't a case where that applies. There's new studies, conflicting studies, studies that haven't been peer reviewed and get propped up by one side or the other but end up getting torn apart during peer review, CDC/WHO giving conflicting information, etc., so I don't disagree that the data is hard to read, but not using pre-vaccine deaths to compare states as evidence of vaccine efficacy isn't one of those situations lol.

Lol more of that bullshit. At no point was it inferred that Saucer ignored it and you were talking about cocke and in order to "get someone" you first have to set them up. Pointing out a flaw in someone's logic they themselves volunteered isn't trying to get them. 

[54212 432]

15 hours ago, Hot Sauce said:

 

I'm not saying you ignored anything, I'm saying Cooke ignored a pretty obvious flaw in his comparison and that the 'data is hard to read' isn't a good excuse for him since this really isn't a case where that applies. There's new studies, conflicting studies, studies that haven't been peer reviewed and get propped up by one side or the other but end up getting torn apart during peer review, CDC/WHO giving conflicting information, etc., so I don't disagree that the data is hard to read, but not using pre-vaccine deaths to compare states as evidence of vaccine efficacy isn't one of those situations lol.

 

After rereading the thread, you're right. I should've left off "I would ask this question to everyone." It was clumsy. I wasn't consciously trying to defend Cooke, but I was, and he didn't need to be defended. And it stepped on the point I wanted to discuss.

[54212 432]

13 hours ago, Mr. Impossible said:

Lol more of that bullshit. At no point was it inferred that Saucer ignored it and you were talking about cocke and in order to "get someone" you first have to set them up. Pointing out a flaw in someone's logic they themselves volunteered isn't trying to get them. 

 

It's the "lol" at the end of the correction that's the gotcha. Be real.

 

 

[Mr. Impossible 407]

3 hours ago, Saucer said:

 

It's the "lol" at the end of the correction that's the gotcha. Be real.

 

 

Iol you're just looking defend another stealth right winger even when they are wrong. 

[54212 432]

5 hours ago, Mr. Impossible said:

Iol you're just looking defend another stealth right winger even when they are wrong. 

 

Okay fine. You're a DNC/MSNBC company man who thinks any dissent from the company line is right wing fascism. Calling Cookie a rightwinger is ridiculous. And way to immediately abandon your weirdo rules about what constitutes a gotcha.

 

 

[Goukosan 2,249]

On 2021-11-23 at 12:17 PM, Hot Sauce said:

 

The list you're referring to is deaths from COVID since the start of the pandemic. Why do you think it's a good list to reference against the efficacy of vaccines?

 

It's Cooke, not suprised he doesn't understand what he posted. 

Edited November 25, 2021 by Goukosan

[Mr. Impossible 407]

2 hours ago, Saucer said:

 

Okay fine. You're a DNC/MSNBC company man who thinks any dissent from the company line is right wing fascism. Calling Cookie a rightwinger is ridiculous. And way to immediately abandon your weirdo rules about what constitutes a gotcha.

 

 

Lol I'm only a Democrat because in NYC you have to be a member of one of the major parties so I chose to be a slash Democrat as proxy but am a member of the WFP. I don't have as many gripes with the DNC AS the GOP but that is because Republicans are fucking insane and cozy with bigotry and warring with logic.

 

Also doesn't help that Republicans don't actually have any plans for anything other than preventing people of color from voting. 

 

As for MSNBC, I do enjoy the alt right wet dreams of leftist loving MSNBC or any other corporate news org because Crowder or Pool or Shapiro told you guys so.  I also didn't want Biden to run, let alone win the nomination. However, seeing the terrible option of Trump who could argue. 

 

At the end of the day like with anything left or right, the rights option is completely fucking terrible. I don't agree with everything left and that is how a healthy democracy to be. It plain sucks that we have a duopoly and one of the options is deplorable. 

 

[Vini 430]

This is certainly a bad look for Biden but the truth is the virus mutated and we should've never let our guards down if the focus was to save lives, but somewhere around early this summer the focus became the economy. 

[Mr. Impossible 407]

On 2021-11-25 at 6:30 AM, Vini said:

This is certainly a bad look for Biden but the truth is the virus mutated and we should've never let our guards down if the focus was to save lives, but somewhere around early this summer the focus became the economy. 

lol Bad look for Biden says the wannabe Trump lawyer. 

[Twinblade★ 3,889]

Interesting how Florida now has the lowest daily case rate in the country, despite also having the least amount of restrictions

 

[Mr. Impossible 407]

1 hour ago, Twinblade said:

Interesting how Florida now has the lowest daily case rate in the country, despite also having the least amount of restrictions

 

lol Uh huh. Why? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, I'm setting you up. 

[jehurey 3,222]

On 2021-11-23 at 12:22 PM, Saucer said:

 

I'd ask this question to everyone. To me the data is a giant maze.

 

CDC current 7-day average:

 

 

https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/?CDC_AA_refVal=https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html#cases_casesper100klast7days

 

 

 

 

What an absolute bullshit and misleading thing you are trying to portray here.

 

A breakout in a less populated area, in your graph, makes it look worse.

 

Here let me demonstrate that for you...............the darkest blue state, Maine:

New Cases: 993

Cases in the last 7 days: 5.850

Cases in the last 7 days/100k: 435.2

7-day % positivity: 8-9.9%

Total Cases: 117,940

Total Cases/100k: 8,774

 

versus a light blue Republican state like Texas, WOW clearly they must be doing very good!:

New Cases: 3,541

Cases in the last 7 days: 22,665

Cases in the last 7 days/100k: 78.2

7-day % positivity: 3-4.9%

Total Cases: 4,296,053

Total Cases/100k: 14,816

 

Gee...........this "complicated maze" almost feels like quick local outbreaks of infections in smaller states with much lower populations results in higher percentages when you contextualize the data in the short-term.

 

And states who have much greater populations are less likely to have such pronounced spikes in rates and percentages

 

How could anybody figure that out?

 

Now let's move onto your other chart.

 

 

Gee, I wonder why you didn't post this line that is right below the VERY CHART you copied and drew red boxes and posted on here:

 

Quote

1Comparing case rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated populations should not be used to estimate vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 infection. Vaccine effectiveness has been formally estimated from a number of different sources and is summarised on pages 5 to 8 in this report.

The case rates in the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations are unadjusted crude rates that do not take into account underlying statistical biases in the data and there are likely to be systematic differences between these 2 population groups. For example:

• people who are fully vaccinated may be more health conscious and therefore more likely to get tested for COVID-19 and so more likely to be identified as a case (based on the data provided by the NHS Test and Trace)

• many of those who were at the head of the queue for vaccination are those at higher risk from COVID-19 due to their age, their occupation, their family circumstances or because of underlying health issues

• people who are fully vaccinated and people who are unvaccinated may behave differently, particularly with regard to social interactions and therefore may have differing levels of exposure to COVID-19

• people who have never been vaccinated are more likely to have caught COVID-19 in the weeks or months before the period of the cases covered in the report. This gives them some natural immunity to the virus for a few months which may have contributed to a lower case rate in the past few weeks

 

You just got busted being absolutely misleading as fuck to try and promote your now official anti-vax stance against the mRNA vaccines.

 

Not only that, but you still tried to post that chart even though the UNvaccinated were dying more, even though there's significantly less of those people in the UK than vaccinated people. And you tried to insinuate that the mRNA vaccines were useless, even though the data clearly gives a damn good reason for being vaccinated. LOL

 

 

Edited November 27, 2021 by jehurey

[54212 432]

You're a pathological liar and your angry incel act is mind-numbingly retarded.

 

You claim the CDC heat maps make "breakouts" look more severe in less populated states without providing any evidence while lying and pretending you have.

 

You haven't defined what a "breakout" is and you haven't explained why the maps make "breakouts" look worse in less populated states. Instead you've done the opposite by posting ME and TX's per-capita infection rates, which shows that when you control for population size, ME still has over x5 the infection rate. ME also has far less population density than TX, and rationally one would expect quick, high-volume spikes to occur much more frequently in large dense population centers, which ME doesn't have but TX does.

 

Then you misrepresent the UK report. If vaccinated people take more precautions not to get infected than unvaccinated people, then the infection rate for vaccinated adults is even more surprising. If they're both vaccinated and more cautious, why are they getting infected at equal or higher rates than unvaccinated adults? If the unvaccinated have a higher per-capita rate of natural immunity, does that indicate that natural immunity prevents infection better than vaccinations? It's not at all cut-and-dry.

 

Then you outright lie twice more and claim I'm against mRNA vaccines and I've said covid is killing vaccinated people at a higher rate than unvaccinated people. I've been vaccinated three times and I said point blank: "The data seems to show the mRNA vaccines do very little if anything to stop infections, but they do reduce the severity of infections, although less than we had expected."

 

All you do is lie. Go clean your room. 

[54212 432]

Who's modding this board? Why haven't you banned this idiot? Everyone else you can have real conversations with but not him. His endless lying and spam is mind-numbingly tedious. The only fun thing to do is insult him but even that gets old. And he has his own politics board so why are you letting him screw-up this one too? I don't get it.

 

Anyway I'm done. If you ban him, I'll be back at some point.
 

[jehurey 3,222]

11 hours ago, Saucer said:

You're a pathological liar and your angry incel act is mind-numbingly retarded.

 

You claim the CDC heat maps make "breakouts" look more severe in less populated states without providing any evidence while lying and pretending you have.

 

You haven't defined what a "breakout" is and you haven't explained why the maps make "breakouts" look worse in less populated states. Instead you've done the opposite by posting ME and TX's per-capita infection rates, which shows that when you control for population size, ME still has over x5 the infection rate. ME also has far less population density than TX, and rationally one would expect quick, high-volume spikes to occur much more frequently in large dense population centers, which ME doesn't have but TX does.

 

Then you misrepresent the UK report. If vaccinated people take more precautions not to get infected than unvaccinated people, then the infection rate for vaccinated adults is even more surprising. If they're both vaccinated and more cautious, why are they getting infected at equal or higher rates than unvaccinated adults? If the unvaccinated have a higher per-capita rate of natural immunity, does that indicate that natural immunity prevents infection better than vaccinations? It's not at all cut-and-dry.

 

Then you outright lie twice more and claim I'm against mRNA vaccines and I've said covid is killing vaccinated people at a higher rate than unvaccinated people. I've been vaccinated three times and I said point blank: "The data seems to show the mRNA vaccines do very little if anything to stop infections, but they do reduce the severity of infections, although less than we had expected."

 

All you do is lie. Go clean your room. 

what defines it as a breakout is the 7-day rolling average.

 

The percentage cannot be that high, unless previous 7-day rolling averages are low.

 

..........and we KNOW that they have been low, because the cumulative numbers are clearly much, much, MUCH lower.

 

So for such a high percentage to occur...........it literally has to be a breakout.

 

Yet that breakout is MUCH LOWER than the "well performing" state that is still having more infected people (Texas).......because of population.

 

basically............you're being misleading by using percentages.

 

Quote

Then you misrepresent the UK report.

No, you literally misrepresent the UK because they specifically issues a disclaimer for the VERY CHART YOU POSTED:

 

Here I will repost it again.

 

Quote

1Comparing case rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated populations should not be used to estimate vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 infection. [Which is what you literally did] Vaccine effectiveness has been formally estimated from a number of different sources and is summarised on pages 5 to 8 in this report.

The case rates in the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations are unadjusted crude rates that do not take into account underlying statistical biases in the data and there are likely to be systematic differences between these 2 population groups.

No, the infection rate for vaccinated adults is not surprising.

 

Vaccinated adults are:

-Going out more

-Not using masks

 

They are returning to normal behavior, and the population that is vaccinated far outnumbers the unvaccinated.  And you just tried to say that their infection rates are wildly out of control, when they're not.

 

And most importantly...........the vaccine is doing EXACTLY what it advertises it should do, prevent serious infection and DEATH.

 

.............as reflected in the death statistics, which are really bad for the unvaccinated compared to the vaccinated.

 

And they are all "Unudjusted rates" on top of that. LOL, I mean you look like an absolutely fucking amateur here.

10 hours ago, Saucer said:

Who's modding this board? Why haven't you banned this idiot? Everyone else you can have real conversations with but not him. His endless lying and spam is mind-numbingly tedious.
 

I literally kicked his ass with statistics and ACTUALLY READING HIS REPORT..............and he's trying to call statistics and quotes "spam"

 

Can you sound anymore like an Incel?He knows he got his ass handed to him, and he's running away.

 

...again

Edited November 30, 2021 by jehurey