I get the feeling that you don't know who reads posts and who doesnt't. So I'm gonna have to call b.s. on this, your latest psycho tirade.
And I wonder if Jim Robinson gets sick of hearing unfounded, lame complaints. I know I would.
Posted on 04/27/2021 12:36:08 PM PDT by BeauBo
(President Trump's Operation Warp Speed Update)
(A big drop (half speed) in the number of shots given - No J&J yet - Cases and Hospitalizations now heading distinctly downward at the National level)
Total Vaccine Doses Delivered: 297,543,635 (17,642,250 J&J)
Administered: 232,407,669 (8,097,650 J&J)
People Vaccinated, At Least One Dose: 141,751,857
Fully Vaccinated: 96,747,454
(Excerpt) Read more at covid.cdc.gov ...
My wife still thinks I’m sexy though.
You shouldn’t be so ignorant.
Look at you...and, your accusations and admonishments.
Sorely disappointing.
I get the feeling that you don't know who reads posts and who doesnt't. So I'm gonna have to call b.s. on this, your latest psycho tirade.
And I wonder if Jim Robinson gets sick of hearing unfounded, lame complaints. I know I would.
Interesting but...
“A Marm Kilpatrick
@DiseaseEcology
·
Feb 11
... Accounting for two revisions above increases efficacy estimates a tiny bit, but it’s lost in rounding estimates to avoid over-precision:
Infection: 90% (86%-93%)
Transmission: 91% (82%-96%) “
So, an independent, knowledgeable person gives the vaccine a 90% efficacy against the virus.
But honestly, the ARR figure is interesting.
Yeah, this “thing” I have about lying on FR is a problem for you.
lol!
The most interesting thing about the ARR metric is how hard it is to find. I never heard about it until recently.
The CDC explainers about the vaccines on their website don’t mention it at all. The paper I linked to above include some figures that make it easy to see the difference between ARR and RRR.
From what I can tell ARR takes into account the risk of getting the disease. Thus, if the chance of getting a disease is low, the ARR will be very low. Whereas it seems that the RRR informs one about the relative difference between the control group and the test group. Thus, RRR can be high even if an individual’s risk is very low.
No clue.
Still not sure how ARR shows the benefit- or not - of vaccination.
The published data is understandable. One’s risk is diminished by a factor of ten.
Actually - you referenced blog posts, not data. So, still apologize if your previous dissertations addressed my questions since you didn’t clarify.
However, since you did not answer either question - normalization of VAERS events by number of inoculations, or if the VAERS database is confirmed results from a vaccine (note to others it isn’t) I would infer that you are avoiding the questions.
Take care.
Agree totally. It’s time for all governors to end mask mandates, closures and capacity limitations… to include the ability of local tyrants to have them locally.
VAERS is not a blog post.
Had you read my thread, you'd know that.
The data set I pulled from VAERS included all records containing 'stroke' in the event description are shown here (freerepublic.com).
You can't be bothered to read my thread and expect me to attentively answer your questions? You're wasting my time.
Yeah, right.
You have no clue why your screen name/posting history are wonky.....nor, who the other, linked poster - who happens to have 1776 in the screen name - is.
Got it.
“VAERS is not a blog post.”
But you lie that it’s input should be believed as a correlation.
You lie and lie.
And expect to be believed.
As your few idiots do.
ARR enables one to compare the absolute risk reduction with the the risks associated with taking the vaccine.
If a person takes the vaccine, the ARR provides an indication of how much the vaccine reduces the risk of getting the disease. E.g., Pfizer and Moderna vax have an ARR of 0.4%-0.7%. So there was a net 0.4%-0.7% less chance of individuals in the test group getting the disease as compared to the individuals in the control group.
One can use this information to compare the risk of harm associated with taking the vax (side-effects, bad reactions, potential for long-term unknown harm, or the like) with how much the vax reduces your chance to get the disease.
Subsequent long-term studies may provide different results, but the ARR and RRR for Pfizer and Moderna vaxs is based on their Phase 3 trials.
For me, an ARR 0.4%-0.7% isn’t worth it to take an untested/novel vaccine. If the number changes with more evidence/research I will reevaluate.
It usually takes 10+ years to deploy a new vaccine because the long-term effects are unknown. And even with conventional testing/evaluation, several vaccines have been pulled from the market after making it through multi-year evaluations because harmful long-term effects are discovered.
“VAERS is not a blog post.”
But you lie that it’s input should be believed as a correlation.
You lie and lie.
And expect to be believed.
As your few idiots do.
~~~~~~~~~
Your posts consist of false accusations and mindless, repetitious insults, yet you still can NOT figure out why I think they’re a waste of time?
“ It usually takes 10+ years to deploy a new vaccine because the long-term effects are unknown”
————————————————-
It use to take weeks for the Pony Express to deliver a letter.
A month to build a car (or horseless carriage).
Months to make a suit of Armour.
Geeeez, get with the times. We have advanced, like this internet thing you’re using.
BTW, 10 years is a old ancient number, now it’s more like 2.
Testing has advanced, DNA replication(which didn’t happen until the 90s) has extremely advanced.
If you are in fear of a vaccine, may I suggest you don’t take the vaccine.
Stop living in fear of a vaccine you’re not going to take,
Nothing “ mindless” about complaining of your constant lying here
Some Freepers, unlike you, actually do care about posting lies here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.