5 5
gowlerk

covid-19

Recommended Posts

(edited)
4 minutes ago, base698 said:

Outright lie is strong language for a 3% difference.

It is what it is. You didn't say "approximately" or "around", you said "97%". You also said he repeated it dozens of times - so you didn't just double down on your error, you multiplied it (at least) 12 times.

Edited by olofscience

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
6 minutes ago, olofscience said:

It is what it is. You didn't say "approximately" or "around", you said "97%". You also said he repeated it dozens of times - so you didn't just double down on your error, you multiplied it (at least) 12 times.

Yeah because I'm not going to dig up every headline where he was quoted. I mispoke because I saw that clip a weeks ago when it first went viral.

My original question was around the idea someone could call any covid vaccine the most effective ever.  Almost every vaccine I'm aware of is better.  

The stated high effectiveness no booster littered the media on March and April.  Whether it was 90% or 99%.  That's much different than 40%-60%.  If you want to quibble over a mistake I made with 3% cool.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity

Des Pfizer have an incentive to get everyone to buy their product on a recurring plan?

Edited by base698

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, kallend said:

Either it's true or it's not.  Since it wasn't true, it WAS a lie.

Easy, really.

It's only a lie if you know the difference.

You have misinformed, the Holy Typo, differing definitions (what does '30% cleaner' mean, anyway), and outright cluelessness.

I'm sure there is a subset in which it is precisely "94% 'effective.'"

It's all how you look at it, actually.  The fact that it's bullshit is immaterial.

 

BSBD,

Winsor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
8 minutes ago, base698 said:

"Almost".

Does BCG wane to zero after six months?

Fair point, but looking at your original question you also said Fauci claimed herd immunity by the summer. So asking me to be charitable is quite dishonest - it's not just a 3% error, you're spreading misinformation on a larger scale.

And for immunity waning after 6 months, the science doesn't seem particularly sure yet. But BCG does offer quite a large amount of antigen targets compared to SARS-COV-2.

Would you have chosen the N protein instead of the S protein as a vaccine target?

Edited by olofscience

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That article contains analysis by CNN which says that “if vaccines continue at their current pace” (hint: they didn’t) then the US could reach here immunity (currently estimated at 70-85%). There are a lot of “estimated” and “current data” caveats. 

Wendy P. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, base698 said:

Right...the title of that article was "US could reach herd immunity by summer through vaccinations alone, CNN analysis finds"

Read the article, nothing.

So I watched the video, and it was Fauci presenting his calculations as rough estimates, and I quote: "...so that I hope, I hope, by the time we get to the fall, we will reach that critical percentage of people...".

Here's what you said:

11 hours ago, base698 said:

There are dozens of clips of Fauci claiming 97% percent effective and saying we'd have herd immunity by summer. 

I think that statement missed the truth by much more than 3%...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, olofscience said:

Honest question, why Fauci? Of all people to hate on, why him? It seems just bizarre.

He's been the figurehead since the beginning.  If you get to be the highest paid government official you also have to take ownership and responsibility for your actions and the actions of your org.  That's how leadership works.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, base698 said:

responsibility for your actions and the actions of your org.

So I looked this up, and Wikipedia shows that he's the director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and Chief Medical Advisor to the President.

Quote

NIAID's mission is to conduct basic and applied research to better understand, treat, and prevent infectious, immunologic, and allergic diseases.

So...his "leadership" is giving advice to the President. I don't think that's actually leadership, the President is the leader. The actions of his org is conducting basic research, so I'm not sure why he should be hated for that.

HOWEVER...he did provide scientific advice back in 2020 when the actual President had no leadership ability at all, so maybe that's why...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, base698 said:

Ok. Here's dozens of headlines and clips of Fauci saying it would be 97% effective.

So I watched it.  He never said 97% effective.  Did you watch it before you posted the link?

Quote

Fact check using the claim he said it would be 100% effective against covid from March for comments on CNN in December 

Again, no, he didn't.  He said it would be NEARLY 100% against severe disease.  Not 100%.  Not against mild disease.  Not against asymptomatic infection.

You seem like a smart guy.  Are you getting these links from an anti-vaxxer and just posting them without reading them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, base698 said:

Here he says 94%.  Outright lie is strong language for a 3% difference.

Claiming he said that it was 97% effective "dozens of times" when he said it zero times is an outright lie.

Claiming 97% effective against COVID, then later altering it to "well, really I meant 94% effective against moderate to severe disease" is just backtracking.  Which, if you've actually learned something new, is no problem.  That's what this forum is for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, base698 said:

Yeah because I'm not going to dig up every headline where he was quoted. I mispoke because I saw that clip a weeks ago when it first went viral.

No worries.  We all make mistakes.  I have found it's a good idea to look up the more hyperbolic claims before posting them, because often people have hidden agendas for claiming things like that.

Quote

The stated high effectiveness no booster littered the media on March and April.  Whether it was 90% or 99%.  That's much different than 40%-60%.  If you want to quibble over a mistake I made with 3% cool.

So in other words it's like a flu vaccine.  Very effective against this year's strain - not so effective against next year's strain.  And sometimes not even that effective overall.  The 2018 flu vaccine was between 36% and 25% effective, based on which strain of the flu they were comparing against.  

A recent study of the MMR (measles mumps rubella) vaccine given in Belgium showed that protection declined from 98% to 53% over time (sound familiar?)  Yet we still use that exact same MMR vaccine worldwide - because it prevents disease in a lot of people, and the benefits outweigh the drawbacks.

Quote

Des Pfizer have an incentive to get everyone to buy their product on a recurring plan?

They actually have an incentive to get you to avoid the vaccine.  A single dose of their mRNA vaccine is $20.  A single dose of monoclonal antibodies is $2200, but that's not given unless you have already become infected.  Which do you think they'd rather sell more of?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, olofscience said:

Honest question, why Fauci? Of all people to hate on, why him? It seems just bizarre.

He's a public figure, and has been on the side of the science since the beginning of the pandemic.  He's the natural target of people who oppose the science and think the pandemic is an evil government plot, or a method the government is using to force some shadowy agenda on people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, base698 said:

He's been the figurehead since the beginning.  If you get to be the highest paid government official you also have to take ownership and responsibility for your actions and the actions of your org. 

Sure, but ownership isn't the same as defending against made up bullshit like you are posting here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, billvon said:

So I watched it.  He never said 97% effective.  Did you watch it before you posted the link?

You seem like a smart guy.  Are you getting these links from an anti-vaxxer and just posting them without reading them?

The one consistent thread I've noted throughout this whole ordeal (in person and elsewhere on the web), is that any video or link or study posted by the Anti's is almost guaranteed to not say what they say it says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mistercwood said:

The one consistent thread I've noted throughout this whole ordeal (in person and elsewhere on the web), is that any video or link or study posted by the Anti's is almost guaranteed to not say what they say it says.

I gotta think that someone, somewhere, is baiting them with all these links.

"Hey guys!  Copy n paste this link!  In it, Fauci is GUARANTEEING that the vaccine is 97%!  He says it dozens of times, trust me!  Don't watch it, just repost it."

And they just copy and paste without watching it.  Is it someone just trying to make them look dumb?  Or is it someone who subscribes to the "Big Lie" theory of politics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
On 11/3/2021 at 6:35 PM, winsor said:

Woke - a disease of denial.  Shown here at its finest.

Deliberate and malicious ignorance. Shown here at its finest.

 

‘I take all the vaccines! I wear five masks based on the science! But let me tell you why they all suck and all the data about them are lies and you shouldn’t listen to any of it.’

PA removed. 

Edited by wmw999
PA removed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

5 5