@eintaluj saidIn fact I would look at hospitalization and find the quota of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated. If the vaccine was ineffective the quorum should be roughly the same.
The probability that the infected person who is hospitalized was earlier vaccinated is not the same thing as the probability that the vaccinated person will be infected and end up in the hospital. If A means "infected and hospitalized" and B means "vaccinated", then the following equation for conditional probabilities generally does NOT hold:
P(A/B) = P(B/A)
For examp ...[text shortened]... under the name of "science", where the list of initial data is incomplete to check the calculations.
It is not. Why?
@ponderable saidI am afraid I have already answered this question above.
In fact I would look at hospitalization and find the quota of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated. If the vaccine was ineffective the quorum should be roughly the same.
It is not. Why?
However, note that if P is the ratio of the vaccinated people in the population, (1 - P) is the ratio of the unvaccinated people in the population; and if the vaccine has zero effectiveness, then the quorum of vaccinated vs unvaccinated patients at the hospitals should not necessarily be 50%/50%. If random people were vaccinated, the quorum at the hospitals should be approximately P/(1 - P).
For example, if random 60% of the people were vaccinated with the absolutely ineffective vaccine, then approximately 60% of the infected people in the hospitals are vaccinated.
If the quorum of vaccination and the quorum of hospitalizations are different, then there might be SEVERAL reasons:
1) The vaccine has some nonzero effectiveness;
2) People were not vaccinated randomly, for example, preferably the elder people were vaccinated;
3) Vaccinated people and unvaccinated people had different exposure to the virus (different number of contacts with the infected people).
This last point was stressed in my essay: the vaccine passports are influencing the statistics in that way. My point was that it is difficult if not impossible to decide the weights of the factors listed above.
@shavixmir saidEveryone is going to get the SARS2 virus. It doesn't matter if you are vaccinated or not, you are all going to get it.
We’ve discussed this stuff for 19 months.
There’s the scientific evidence and there is moronity.
And one just can’t be arsed arguing the same thing over and over.
So, I created the alert. It sums up everything, quickly, efficiently and rounds off where it’s all headed anyway.
You are in denial of that fact. That is moronity.
@metal-brain saidThere's the answer.
Everyone is going to get the SARS2 virus. It doesn't matter if you are vaccinated or not, you are all going to get it.
You are in denial of that fact. That is moronity.
You're working for the pod people.
Šavikšmir is proud that he or she has discussed these issues already 19 months. One thinks that everything is explained already in these discussions.
Unfortunately, my essay tackled the questions of compulsory vaccination, vaccination passports and the idea proposed that unvaccinated people should be left without medical help. These issues have been on the table in the last few months. No one was suggesting medical genocide against the unvaccinated 19 months ago. Therefore, a suspicion arises that Šavikšmir is a part of the conspiracy and suggested that genocide already 19 months ago. Thus, maybe Šavikšmir should answer some questions in Nürnberg's court.
Also, those who have accused me above of being an "antivaxxer" should understand that the criticism of genocide or compulsory vaccinations or vaccination passports is in no way a criticism of vaccines or a negative attitude towards ALL vaccines.
As you can see, those people above who have accused me of being incompetent are absolutely incompetent indeed. If one confuses the issue of vaccine passports with the issue of vaccines, then one is as incompetent as those who do not know the difference between viruses and bacteria, between different sorts of vaccines, etc.
It turns out that some people who are talking "in the name of science" are really unscientific and incompetent indeed.
@eintaluj saidThere is no definable logic to your argument it’s just you trying desperately to muddy the waters like all anti vaxxers.
You are slandering me and you did not say absolutely anything relevant to my initial post.
You do not explain your definition of "far right". There is nothing in my essay that is specific even to the right-wing. Besides, my views in political philosophy correspond to classical liberalism, not to the right-wing. John Locke and John Stuart Mill are my favourites. But this ...[text shortened]... and logic of my essay. It is curious that ALL your remarks are mistaken and irrelevant to my essay.
Pretending to not know or understand the numbers regarding the hospitalisation and death rates regarding the unvaxxed versus the vaxxed makes you a bad actor who is hoping to see more people die and suffer with covid. Do not expect your opinion on this to be treated as a viewpoint worthy of respect.
@kevcvs57 saidI do not respond anymore to such comments that fail to address the arguments presented in my essay initially posted above.
There is no definable logic to your argument it’s just you trying desperately to muddy the waters like all anti vaxxers.
Pretending to not know or understand the numbers regarding the hospitalisation and death rates regarding the unvaxxed versus the vaxxed makes you a bad actor who is hoping to see more people die and suffer with covid. Do not expect your opinion on this to be treated as a viewpoint worthy of respect.
@kevcvs57 saidAs well one could declare that you are a paedophile, a raper or a serial killer. In both cases, no evidence whatsoever and no relation whatsoever to the comments or the posts.
Don’t feel you need to but rest assured I will respond to any anti vax posts that you put up.
Red Hot Pawn fails to take down systematic spammers from the forum.
I am afraid I will not recommend that platform to chessplayers, therefore.
- Joined
- 06 Nov 15
- Moves
- 41301
@metal-brain saidShe doesn't work for you.
You are working for the stupid people.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/coronavirus-experts-warn-were-all-going-to-get-infected-by-disease/UDURAYTYCVBELBTSYMKWHSU2I4/
We are all going to get it.
@EintaluJ
For one thing, the Corona virus is not just ONE type. Now they have been studied very well for more than 10 years and that is what allowed the speedy production of C19 vaccines.
The right wingers try to say the vaccine is unsafe because it is so new but it is definitely NOT new, it is based on DECADES of solid research.
BTW, the work on covid has led some researchers to connect that work to HIV and they may make a vaccine for HIV.
THAT is a really big scourge on mankind.
Also new work on vaccines for malaria.
I believe in science and I am not blind to scientists who cheat and such and they usually get caught out eventually.
The bottom line is the vaccine works and it is only the Trumpite cult obeying instructions from their god king which keeps this thing going at least here in the US.
Trump has singlehandedly almost ruined the entire US government with his sycophants appointed to not be an independent cabinet member or AG but he treats them ALL as if they were his personal lawyer and henchmen.
And women.
THAT is an ABSOLUTE fact.
Trump has NO friends.
Trump is ONLY interest in increasing the wealth of Donald Trump NOBODY else.
He also used his AG and others to be a henchman to pursue his enemies and give his buddies pardons even though like Steve Bannon was actually convicted in a court of law.
BTW Bannon is back in the hot seat now and I hope that SOB gets what is coming to him.
Bannon and Trump are BOTH LITERAL traitors to the USA..
That is not an opinion, that is based on their conduct.
@sonhouse
"For one thing, the Corona virus is not just ONE type."
- I know this. Nothing in my essay assumes that there is only one coronavirus. However, there are perhaps only a few such coronaviruses that are able to infect human beings.
"Now they have been studied very well for more than 10 years and that is what allowed the speedy production of C19 vaccines."
- I was not talking about speedy PRODUCTION but rather about the speedy conclusion that the vaccine produced is sufficiently effective and safe to start to sell it. In fact, the official tests of Pfizer's vaccine have NOT been finished yet. It is well known that the most time-consuming part of producing a new usable vaccine is testing it, particularly testing it on human beings.
"The right wingers try to say the vaccine is unsafe because it is so new but it is definitely NOT new, it is based on DECADES of solid research."
- What right-wingers? I do not understand why you are talking here about the right-wingers? How is it relevant at all? When Donald Trump was the president of the US, he certainly endorsed the vaccines against Covid. Moreover, I have NOT said that the vaccine is unsafe or insufficiently safe. I have said nothing about it. You seem to lack the ability of functional reading. And the fact that one can quickly produce some vaccine against some new virus in now way proves that one can shorten the time required for testing that vaccine.
I will not read your comment till the end, enough is enough. Too many mistakes in too few sentences.