Allan

39 minutes ago, waysider said:

You're still trying to build a patient profile without any statistical evidence to justify your conclusion.

Not trying to build anything at all, simply stating that the graph Rocky posted was missing major details.

12 minutes ago, waysider said:

The graph is clearly dated at the bottom. These are the numbers for Monday, 11/15/2021. The link shows other days that offer some perspective. There is no (zero) information to indicate patient age or general health status. You have assumed these details in an effort to create a fictitious patient profile. This is dishonest and dangerous. If anything, there is a good chance these are a younger demographic than we saw in the early pandemic because a high percentage of the elderly have already been vaccinated. But, we don't know that for certain. I think it's a fair assumption, though.

anything can be assumed, without the full facts...going by past statistics, I'd say they would be older, and/or health compromised people :)

55 minutes ago, Rocky said:

And I simply redirected your pointless ramblings such that if you have QUESTIONS about the facts presented, IF you have even one iota of intellectual honesty or curiosity, you would/could pursue answers to said questions. Nothing more, nothing less.

The graphIC presents DATA. DATA = FACT. If more FACTS are necessary to address your questions, I showed you where to direct those questions.

I'm not interested in digging into that graph any further because I'm pretty sure I know what the answer is i.e. the 'status' of the patients..if it floats your boat, you present the full facts, thanks in advance.

1 hour ago, Rocky said:

I address this to whoever reads this.

Obviously, the graphIC shows ONE point in time. The things the Aussie claims the graphIC tells him are NOT facts. They are his false assumptions. IF he had even one iota of intellectual honesty or curiosity, he WOULD articulate his assumptions rather as questions and then seek out the answers to those questions.

The graph presents FACTS. The arrogant, socially handicapped Aussie claims things that are neither specified, articulated, nor implied by the FACTS presented in the graphIC.

If anyone wants to find more facts or information to answer questions the reader may reasonably formulate based on the FACTS presented in the graphIC, I provided links to the healthcare facility so that any such questions can be directed to those at said facility who may provide additional insight.

 

I'm simply saying that graph tells only a tiny fraction of the whole picture concerning deaths in Cheyenne...nothing about age, comorbidities, etc...it is pointless.

21 minutes ago, Rocky said:

over what period of time ? This graph tells me there were a total of 15 unvaccinated people in Cheyenne that were either a/ over 80 years old or b/ obese or 3/ had underlying health issues or...possibly all 3 !!...what I'm really saying is the 'stats' are not giving us all the 'facts' 

28 minutes ago, Rocky said:

By what authority do you demand anyone respond to your inane, misleading questions?

"authority" ?? "Demand" ?? you're sounding more and more Marxist everyday 

20 hours ago, Twinky said:

Can't speak for the truth or otherwise of the article, but it's badly written and inaccurate in its use of the English language, which always makes me suspicious about less obvious content.

As I said earlier, do you have any examples of this from the article ??

6 hours ago, waysider said:

A direct quote from the article:

“These events are often coincidental, rather than being caused by the vaccine, therefore any attempts to link the two based on a temporal association alone is misleading,”

You 'forgot' the next line oh darn...


However, a large study from the UK in August did find an increased risk of stroke associated with Pfizer.

6 hours ago, waysider said:

"ANY vaccines.....are ALWAYS too late."

This is what you said, did you not?

.

Yes I did  my little gnat strainer 

1 hour ago, waysider said:

This is what you said:

"Any vaccinations conjured up for for flu type viruses (including covid) are always too late because the virus mutates a multitude of times before the shots even ministered."

 

This is a direct quote from the article:

"the composition of flu vaccines is reviewed annually, and vaccines are updated to protect against the viruses that research indicates will be most common during the upcoming flu season."

 

Do you honestly not see what's wrong with your claim?

 

 

and this is a follow on from the quote...do you honestly think the EXACT SAME flu virus comes round every year ? If you do, I sure hope you're not working in the medical field ................text underlined to try to help you out !!

You may be exposed to a flu virus that is not included in the seasonal flu vaccine. There are many different flu viruses that circulate every year. A flu vaccine is made to protect against the three or four flu viruses that research suggests will be most common.

Influenza (flu) vaccine effectiveness (VE) can vary. The protection provided by a flu vaccine varies from season to season and depends in part on the age and health status of the person getting the vaccine and the similarity or “match” between the viruses in the vaccine and those in circulation. During years when the flu vaccine match is good, it is possible to measure substantial benefits from flu vaccination in terms of preventing flu illness and complications. However, the benefits of flu vaccination will still vary, depending on characteristics of the person being vaccinated (for example, their health and age), what influenza viruses are circulating that season and, potentially, which type of flu vaccine was used.

1 hour ago, Rocky said:

2016? HA! In data science, five year old narratives are archaic and anachronistic.

Nevertheless, you disavowed reliance on data for credible decision-making. You added a dismissive emoji as if you had proven anything? Sure, Poindexter.

The journal wasn't presenting 'data', they were presenting as to why majority of data is open to bias and prejudice (something right up your alley) and cannot be taken as 'gospel'...if you didn't get the differnce, no wonder you're happy to blindly 'follow the science' 

1 hour ago, Rocky said:

2016? HA! In data science, five year old narratives are archaic and anachronistic.

Nevertheless, you disavowed reliance on data for credible decision-making. You added a dismissive emoji as if you had proven anything? Sure, Poindexter.

Oh so truth comes with a use by date according to you, nice one 

13 minutes ago, Rocky said:

Admitting that he doesn't accept DATA from institutions responsible for dealing with the problem is essentially the same as boldly proclaiming that he embraces nothing but cockamamie conspiracy theories.

DATA = FACTS. 

 

Data is not facts - the impossibility of being unbiased - Data ...

https://www.datasciencecentral.com › profiles › blogs › da..


-(Taken from a 'data science' organization) lol, you need to get your facts right 

13 minutes ago, waysider said:

I'm not sure you realize this, Allan, but this article offers no evidence to back the claim you made that I questioned.

My claim was that the flu virus mutates a multitude of times in any given year, this is why the flu shots are always a year too late...you asked for evidence...I've given you the direct evidence quoted from CDC website...here it is again...

 

• You may be exposed to a flu virus that is not included in the seasonal flu vaccine. There are many different flu viruses that circulate every year. A flu vaccine is made to protect against the three or four flu viruses that research suggests will be most common.
  
  Influenza (flu) vaccine effectiveness (VE) can vary. The protection provided by a flu vaccine varies from season to season and depends in part on the age and health status of the person getting the vaccine and the similarity or “match” between the viruses in the vaccine and those in circulation. During years when the flu vaccine match is good, it is possible to measure substantial benefits from flu vaccination in terms of preventing flu illness and complications. However, the benefits of flu vaccination will still vary, depending on characteristics of the person being vaccinated (for example, their health and age), what influenza viruses are circulating that season and, potentially, which type of flu vaccine was used.
  
  Why are their differnt flu viruses every year ? Because they MUTATE...like COVID...so what part of this info do you disagree or struggle with ?? Do you know more than the CDC (wouldn't be hard) lol

6 hours ago, Bolshevik said:

Censoring information?  Who? Where?

The age of information means developing skills to sort through unlimited information.  

and DISinformation

5 minutes ago, waysider said:

Your evidence?

From your very own beloved, trustworthy, straight up CDC website -

Why do I need a flu vaccine every year?

A flu vaccine is needed every year for two reasons. First, a person’s immune protection from vaccination declines over time, so an annual flu vaccine is needed for optimal protection. Second, because flu viruses are constantly changing, the composition of flu vaccines is reviewed annually, and vaccines are updated to protect against the viruses that research indicates will be most common during the upcoming flu season. For the best protection, everyone 6 months and older should get vaccinated annually.

 

Vaccine Effectiveness

2 minutes ago, HAPe4me said:

Yeah but you swallow the crap from quacks and other ne’r-do-well liars , so who cares what you say?

that is why I addressed Skyrider not you. 
 

for what it is worth, I have friends who work ICU’s here and they confirm what this administrator says about the numbers but that is immaterial since you reject real science and the preponderance of evidence.

Absolutely, I prefer the advice and comments from people who 'have no skin in the game' except for THE truth to be told. :)

Just now, Allan said:

COVID-19 and Kids: What you need to know | CHQ (health.qld.gov.au)

Extracts from our own Govt website- 

How many kids have been sick so far?

While children do catch the SARS-CoV-2 virus which causes COVID-19, the data internationally has consistently reported the lowest rates are in children. Pre-school and primary school age children in particular appear less likely to acquire the infection and make up less than 5% of reported cases in Australia and elsewhere.

 

“Importantly, the published data also suggests that children tend to have less severe cases of COVID-19 than adults,” says Children’s Health Queensland Director of Infectious Diseases Julia Clark. “In most cases the virus causes mild or moderate symptoms, which can include fever and cough, but also milder cases of pneumonia sometimes requiring hospitalisation.”

“Severe complications in children are uncommon,” Dr Clark adds.
erious illness remains extremely rare in children. While there are reports of higher rates of child deaths in some countries, a population-based analysis of 12 million children in the UK in 2020 found 1 in 50,000 children experienced a critical illness, and the rate of death related to COVID-19 was 2 per million children. In comparison, about one half of all adults with critical illness (predominantly elderly people with chronic conditions) have died.

Are children and young people more at risk of infection with the Delta variant?
 

 The majority of transmission still occurs in the household. Infection rates in young children remain lower than other age groups despite the absence of vaccination.

Is the delta strain more dangerous for children and young people?

There is no evidence that Delta variant causes more serious illness in children specifically Reassuringly data from the UK suggests admission rates for children have not increased despite emerging reports across the world that admission to hospital may be increased in young adults compared to previous variants. The good news is the vast majority of children with the Delta variant continue to experience a mild infection. Severe infections in children requiring intensive care unit admission or leading to death remain surprisingly uncommon throughout the pandemic.

1 hour ago, Rocky said:

Vaccine side effects in school age children.

COVID-19 and Kids: What you need to know | CHQ (health.qld.gov.au)

5 minutes ago, HAPe4me said:

Skyrider, I am a data driven guy and the data I see here in Colorado does not align with “the vaccines are not effective in preventing contractions or even serious complications”

I recognize your hesitancy in accepting releases from the CDC, so this is directly from UCHealth, one of our larger hospital systems. (Other Colorado hospitals are reporting almost the same numbers)

“Across Colorado, about 80% of adults are now vaccinated against COVID-19. Inside our hospitals, we’re seeing that the other 20% who are unvaccinated are making up the vast majority of our patients with COVID-19. As the charts below show, nearly 81% of our patients hospitalized with COVID-19 are unvaccinated, and nearly 90% of our COVID-19 patients ventilated in ICUs are unvaccinated. Of our hospitalized patients who were vaccinated at the time of admission, many are immunocompromised.”

https://www.uchealth.org/today/covid-19-coronavirus-recent-updates/

My point is, if 80% are vaccinated but the 20% who are NOT vaccinated make up 81% of hospitalizations and 91% of ventilated patients, the math indicates the vaccines are helping keep the vaccinated safer.

sure, there are breakthrough cases. There always are with mutating viruses (witness the flu). However except in individuals who have other health issues, those are primarily not requiring hospitalization or ventilators amongst the vast majority of the population who is vaccinated here.

I hope that helps you understand how I look at it.

And I'm a 'don't swallow all the data coming out of institutions' kinda guy :)

46 minutes ago, Bolshevik said:

https://becomingchristians.com/2017/07/17/are-you-limiting-god/

 

Great, now I've got a sudden interest in titles with question marks asking leading . . .  Stuff . . . There goes my evening

ah come on...pour yourself a Glenfiddich :)

1 hour ago, skyrider said:

Thanks again to GSC......for keeping this *Open Discussion* available.

While others are censoring information.......GSC stands tall.  

Myocarditis, pericarditis: Are rare Pfizer Covid vaccine heart issues underreported to TGA? | news.com.au — Australia’s leading news site

1 hour ago, Twinky said:

Can't speak for the truth or otherwise of the article, but it's badly written and inaccurate in its use of the English language, which always makes me suspicious about less obvious content.

In what way was it badly written ? And in which way inaccurate in the English language ? Spelling was my top subject throughout schooling, I couldn't see any obvious spelling mistakes...so what is it ?

54 minutes ago, Raf said:

Lies about India, then blames politics.

Pathetic.

Lies about politics, then blames India 

1 hour ago, Raf said:

Dude gets his facts prom demonstrated liars and calls other people "shallow."

Why did you lie about India, Allan?

 

What do you mean lie about India ? Because the governing medical body (tied in with WHO and American drug companies) said "Ivermectin and HDC doesn't work ?? 

Do you believe everything you read from one-sided sources ?? That's what I mean by shallow !!
The link I am posting below TOTALLY SUMS UP WHAT MANY OF US WELL ROUNDED, BALANCED, FAIR MINDED, CENTRIST THINKING PEOPLE BELIEVE....I suggest you read it slowly, carefully...from a Doctor's perspective who has not been 'bought off'

Ivermectin obliterates 97 percent of Delhi cases | National | thedesertreview.com