CDC on hospitalization for covid in kids.
This is only 200 kids, so we’re talking about quite rare events, but if they happen, they have a reasonable chance of being serious.
I think this will eventually be established as the norm for everyone. The risks are pretty overblown for the average person - but if the odds do beat you, they really beat you.
On political censorship of scientific inquiry, the ivermectin edition
Bullsh!t. That study said absolutely nothing about parties.
It says that households where a child had a birthday in the last two weeks had 66 positive cases per 10,000, while households without a child’s birthday had 51 positive cases per 10,000. That’s less than 3/4 of one percent either way.
A difference of less than 16 in a sample of 10,000 is not a significant variance. Less than two tenths of one percent is well within the margin of error for expected results in a group of 10,000.
I don’t understand the point of the study.
Researchers: We think that social gatherings are associated with COVID risk. We’re going to prove it by looking at birthdays because people gather around birthdays.
Everyone in the world: We already knew that social gatherings are associated with COVID risk. Why are you trying to prove something we already know?
The headline is garbage. Birthday parties don’t “fuel COVID spread.” All social gatherings (especially in counties in the top decile of county COVID-19 prevalence) fuel COVID spread. We already knew that, but these “researchers” just wanted to reprove it and they used birthdays because it was super easy data to gather and analyze.
Peter Daszak, the “no conflicts of interest” funder of grants to Wuhan to study gain of function research in coronaviruses, has been removed as the lead investigator into covid origins. I can see why China approved him.
The WHO report that he helped to author described animals as the ‘most likely’ source of the pandemic, and called for further investigation into it. Suggestions that the virus leaked from any of the labs in Wuhan - including the Institute of Virology - were dismissed as ‘extremely unlikely’. Yet it later emerged that the WHO team was only given three hours in the lab and were not given access to all the documentation they needed - further darkening the cloud of suspicion about a ‘whitewash’.
Daszak and other EcoHealth scientists have been closely involved with the Wuhan lab for years, which was also conducting ‘gain of function’ experiments, where viruses are genetically engineered to be more infectious to test their effects on human cells.
It’s hilarious that Daszak’s removal has come so late. But medical politics is equally as toxic as is all other politics.
You knew you didn’t want the Chinese vaccines.
examples from several countries suggest that the Chinese vaccines may not be very effective at preventing the spread of the virus, particularly the new variants. The experiences of those countries lay bare a harsh reality facing a post-pandemic world: The degree of recovery may depend on which vaccines governments give to their people.
In the Seychelles, Chile, Bahrain and Mongolia, 50% to 68% of the populations have been fully inoculated, outpacing the United States, according to Our World In Data, a data tracking project. All four ranked among the top 10 countries with the worst COVID outbreaks as recently as last week, according to data from The New York Times. And all four are mostly using shots made by two Chinese vaccine makers, Sinopharm and Sinovac Biotech.
How can the inventors be so inept with the cure? Was it intentional?
My response to over half the studies that are reported. The studies, themselves, are probably clickbait for funding. The reporting of the studies are for dumbbot ad clickbait.
The Chinese used the very old vaccine approach - slice up the actual virus into defunct pieces and inject it so your body sees the pieces so they’ll recognize. It’s how vaccines were originally made before all these fancy viral vectors or mRNA approaches. It’s more variable in its outcomes because people may react differently to all the different pieces (instead of just the spike protein), but it tends to be more robust to mutations since it’s more broad spectrum.
When the first pandemic started, this honestly seemed like the best approach that would be most likely to work pretty well. But the new tech approaches are more targeted so they could aim in on the functional spike protein part. It turns out this was better, and actually a fair bit better. Part of this has to do with how the covid virus is particularly nasty in that it inactivates several aspects of the bodies innate cellular defenses so several aspects of broader approach were getting thwarted.
Doing their best to look guilty, Wuhan round 10. Early sequences of the covid virus, which could shed light on the early evolution and origin, were deleted from a US public database by the Chinese contributors.
"Nearly all COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. now are in people who weren’t vaccinated, a staggering demonstration of how effective the shots have been and an indication that deaths per day — now down to under 300 — could be practically zero if everyone eligible got the vaccine.
An Associated Press analysis of available government data from May shows that “breakthrough” infections in fully vaccinated people accounted for fewer than 1,200 of more than 853,000 COVID-19 hospitalizations. That’s about 0.1%.
And only about 150 of the more than 18,000 COVID-19 deaths in May were in fully vaccinated people. That translates to about 0.8%, or five deaths per day on average."
"… CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said on Tuesday that the vaccine is so effective that "nearly every death, especially among adults, due to COVID-19, is, at this point, entirely preventable.” She called such deaths “particularly tragic.”
So in May, 2% of unvaccinated hospitalizations died, while 12.5% of vaccinated hospitalizations died.
^^^ LOL. What are you trying to say?
But also, those who died in May weren’t necessarily hospitalized in May, so your numbers are wrong.
Just tossing out random stats based on the data.
What I’d try to say is that this particular article only reinforces the postion that once vaccinated, it should be none of your business what anyone else choses to do. The group deciding to remain unvaccinated only poses a risk to themselves.
My takeaway is that mostly “sick and/or old” people die from COVID and vaccinations have reinforced that. The majority of people that the vaccine doesn’t “work” on are sick and/or old people. Therefore, when the vaccine doesn’t work, and they get COVID, then have a much greater chance of dying.
I wouldnt put it that way. I’d say it doesnt work on those with “defective” immune systems, which inherently make them more vulnerable to an infection. It makes sense that if the vaccine doesnt trigger the necessary response, an active infection will not as well.