Vaxxed cruise ship gets infected and vaxxed lady dies

[Slade3200]

Well, since you now seem to agree with me it's now a moot point, don't you think? Now we both agree that in the most highly vaccinated parts of the world, Delta is surging.

I never didn’t agree with that point. Can you show where I ever took issue with it? No you can’t because I didn’t.

 

[Independent thinker]

I never didn’t agree with that point. Can you show where I ever took issue with it? No you can’t because I didn’t.

So, you're saying that your question has now become a moot question?

 

[Slade3200]

So, you're saying that your question has now become a moot question?

My question is just a simple question. The fact that you are trying so hard to avoid answering it shows that it is quite relevant. If it was moot then you wouldn't be hiding from it, you'd just give the answer.

 

[Independent thinker]

My question is just a simple question. The fact that you are trying so hard to avoid answering it shows that it is quite relevant. If it was moot then you wouldn't be hiding from it, you'd just give the answer.

But, you have come around to agreeing with me, so the question has now become moot. If it is so important to you, why don't you just make up any number you want as if I had posted it and the you can be happy rebutting whatever number you want to use. Go ahead, I give you permission to post any number you want and say the number came from me. Here, I'll set it up for you:

The efficacy rate for the Pfizer vaccine is _____.

 

[Slade3200]

But, you have come around to agreeing with me, so the question has now become moot. If it is so important to you, why don't you just make up any number you want as if I had posted it and the you can be happy rebutting whatever number you want to use. Go ahead, I give you permission to post any number you want and say the number came from me. Here, I'll set it up for you:

The efficacy rate for the Pfizer vaccine is _____.

I never didn't agree with your point. You are making up a fake conflict to distract from a question Ive asked you dozens of time now that you can't give a straight answer to. You said you knew the answer. you said you posted a link to what the efficacy rate is... So what is it? Post it...

What is the efficacy rate of the Pfizer vaccine?

 

[Independent thinker]

I never didn't agree with your point. You are making up a fake conflict to distract from a question Ive asked you dozens of time now that you can't give a straight answer to. You said you knew the answer. you said you posted a link to what the efficacy rate is... So what is it? Post it...

What is the efficacy rate of the Pfizer vaccine?

LOL. I told you. I give you permission to post whatever number you want and say it came from me if it is so important to you to rebut whatever I say, even though you admit that you agree with me. Just use whatever number you want. It can be the right number or any number you choose, even if it is wrong. I can't make it any simpler for you than that.

 

[Slade3200]

LOL. I told you. I give you permission to post whatever number you want and say it came from me if it is so important to you to rebut whatever I say, even though you admit that you agree with me. Just use whatever number you want. It can be the right number or any number you choose, even if it is wrong. I can't make it any simpler for you than that.

Its not about what I want to say. I want to know what YOU think the number is... Do you believe it is zero or do you believe it exists in a certain range? If a range then what is it or use an approximate number based on reported stats if you believe the stats...

 

[Independent thinker]

Its not about what I want to say. I want to know what YOU think the number is... Do you believe it is zero or do you believe it exists in a certain range? If a range then what is it or use an approximate number based on reported stats if you believe the stats...

Well now, maybe I can answer that question, to some degree anyway. But, you refuse to accept part of my answer. I highly doubt that the number is zero. I'm sure that the vaccines do prevent a number of cases but do not actually decrease cases because science facts show us that the virus is surging, even in the most highly vaccinated places in the world. There have been several different studies showing several different efficacy numbers on, we'll say just the Pfizer vaccine, since that is the particular vaccine you keep on asking about. So, even with the established science, there have been several different numbers. Your problem is that instead of trying to find out the real truth and nothing but the truth, you want to go with outdated information as the science continues to evolve and whatever numbers that are available today will NOT be the numbers published a few months from now. Whatever the current science is, it is months or years behind the truth that will come out later. We need to look ahead to the science which hasn't come out yet.

Now, the part that you don't seem to agree with me on is that it really doesn't matter what papers or science say is the efficacy rate because the science and the facts are that even in the most highly vaccinated places on the planet, cases continue surging. That's the facts. They are indisputable. Therefore, the vaccines aren't doing shit at decreasing cases. You seem to be making the argument, "But look where we would be without vaccines" but it doesn't really matter because with the vaccines, cases are surging. So, we need to get over that and concentrate on what we really need to concentrate on, the fact that the vaccines do a terrific job at greatly reducing hospitalizations and deaths. And, since the vaccines don't do crap at stopping the spread of Delta, we need to quit with the vaccine passport crap and demonizing the unvaccinated because the vaccinated are spreading Delta to a very high degree and the wrong public perception that vaccines are decreasing cases leads to the vaccinated being more cocky and spreading the virus even more than if they knew the truth that vaccines don't do much at stopping the spread.

I implore you to read the following link which accurately describes where I am coming from. By the way, I pilfered if from a post in another forum by a guy who is extremely pro-vaccine. He has now come around to understanding that the messaging needs to be changed, which is MY argument.

Infectious disease expert: Americans must 'recalibrate' vaccine expectations

Infectious disease expert: Americans must 'recalibrate' vaccine expectations

www.yahoo.com

Americans Are Losing Sight of the Pandemic Endgame

Entirely eliminating infections is an unrealistic goal, but successful vaccines will avoid the worst outcomes.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[Slade3200]

Well now, maybe I can answer that question, to some degree anyway. But, you refuse to accept part of my answer. I highly doubt that the number is zero. I'm sure that the vaccines do prevent a number of cases but do not actually decrease cases because science facts show us that the virus is surging, even in the most highly vaccinated places in the world. There have been several different studies showing several different efficacy numbers on, we'll say just the Pfizer vaccine, since that is the particular vaccine you keep on asking about. So, even with the established science, there have been several different numbers. Your problem is that instead of trying to find out the real truth and nothing but the truth, you want to go with outdated information as the science continues to evolve and whatever numbers that are available today will NOT be the numbers published a few months from now. Whatever the current science is, it is months or years behind the truth that will come out later. We need to look ahead to the science which hasn't come out yet.

Now, the part that you don't seem to agree with me on is that it really doesn't matter what papers or science say is the efficacy rate because the science and the facts are that even in the most highly vaccinated places on the planet, cases continue surging. That's the facts. They are indisputable. Therefore, the vaccines aren't doing shit at decreasing cases. You seem to be making the argument, "But look where we would be without vaccines" but it doesn't really matter because with the vaccines, cases are surging. So, we need to get over that and concentrate on what we really need to concentrate on, the fact that the vaccines do a terrific job at greatly reducing hospitalizations and deaths. And, since the vaccines don't do crap at stopping the spread of Delta, we need to quit with the vaccine passport crap and demonizing the unvaccinated because the vaccinated are spreading Delta to a very high degree and the wrong public perception that vaccines are decreasing cases leads to the vaccinated being more cocky and spreading the virus even more than if they knew the truth that vaccines don't do much at stopping the spread.

I implore you to read the following link which accurately describes where I am coming from. By the way, I pilfered if from a post in another forum by a guy who is extremely pro-vaccine. He has now come around to understanding that the messaging needs to be changed, which is MY argument.

Infectious disease expert: Americans must 'recalibrate' vaccine expectations

Infectious disease expert: Americans must 'recalibrate' vaccine expectations

www.yahoo.com

Americans Are Losing Sight of the Pandemic Endgame

Entirely eliminating infections is an unrealistic goal, but successful vaccines will avoid the worst outcomes.

www.theatlantic.com

The only thing I have expressed disagreement on so far is your claim that the "vaccines aren't doing shit at decreasing cases." I've simply been asking for pages and pages and pages now if you believe the vaccines have an efficacy rate and if so what you think it is.

Saying that you think it is a number greater than zero is a start. So what do you think it is. I used to be 95% but then Delta came and now it is being tested around 66%. Do you think that is ballpark? If not then what do you think the ball park efficacy rate is for the vaccines?

 

[Independent thinker]

The only thing I have expressed disagreement on so far is your claim that the "vaccines aren't doing shit at decreasing cases." I've simply been asking for pages and pages and pages now if you believe the vaccines have an efficacy rate and if so what you think it is.

Saying that you think it is a number greater than zero is a start. So what do you think it is. I used to be 95% but then Delta came and now it is being tested around 66%. Do you think that is ballpark? If not then what do you think the ball park efficacy rate is for the vaccines?

It doesn't matter what the efficacy rate is, cases are surging, even in the most highly vaccinated countries on the planet. Once again, you are trying to say, "Yeah, but how many cases would there be if we didn't have the vaccines"?


Here is the 2021 Covid chart for Israel, the world's most highly vaccinated country:

Israel COVID-19 stats - Realtime coronavirus statistics with charts

You can see cases surging after 80% were fully vaccinated.

Let's say, for the sake of Argument, that the efficacy rate of the Pfizer vaccine is 42%. At a supposed 42% efficacy rate Israel's number of infected rose from near zero on July 1st to over 1 million less than 2 months later and that is with the highest number of vaccinated in the world. Your argument seems to be that, "Yeah, but there would be over 2 million infected but for the efficacy rate of the vaccines. That's the best you can argue? As I said, no one really knows the true efficacy rate and it really doesn't matter because no matter what you say, the number of infected in the world's most vaccinated country has risen from close to zero to over one million people during the time that 80% were fully vaccinated. We need to quit pretending that the vaccinated are not spreading Delta because they are and they are A LOT.

So, as I have been saying all along, we can learn two things from the Israeli graph:

1. The vaccines aren't doing diddly at stopping the spread of Delta because even the vaccinated are spreading Delta

2. The vaccines are extremely effective at cutting down hospitalizations and deaths.

So, trick question here:

If the US could get our vaccination rate up to the world's best at 80%, what would be the result of that?

Answer, our cases would still be surging

Maybe you think I'm making a case against vaccines but I am not. I highly recommend vaccines. But, we need to quit demonizing the unvaccinated and having vaccine passports because the vaccinated are also spreading Delta.

 

[Slade3200]

It doesn't matter what the efficacy rate is, cases are surging, even in the most highly vaccinated countries on the planet. Once again, you are trying to say, "Yeah, but how many cases would there be if we didn't have the vaccines"?


Here is the 2021 Covid chart for Israel, the world's most highly vaccinated country:

Israel COVID-19 stats - Realtime coronavirus statistics with charts

You can see cases surging after 80% were fully vaccinated.

Let's say, for the sake of Argument, that the efficacy rate of the Pfizer vaccine is 42%. At a supposed 42% efficacy rate Israel's number of infected rose from near zero on July 1st to over 1 million less than 2 months later and that is with the highest number of vaccinated in the world. Your argument seems to be that, "Yeah, but there would be over 2 million infected but for the efficacy rate of the vaccines. That's the best you can argue? As I said, no one really know the true efficacy rate and it really doesn't matter because no matter what you say, the number of infected in the world's most vaccinated country has risen from close to zero to over one million people during the time that 80% were fully vaccinated. We need to quit pretending that the vaccinated are not spreading Delta because they are and they are A LOT.

Now you are going broken record on me. I don't care if you don't think it matters or not. I'm just looking for a simple answer about what you think it is. Answer that and then we can debate whether it matters or not.

 

[Slade3200]

It doesn't matter what the efficacy rate is, cases are surging, even in the most highly vaccinated countries on the planet. Once again, you are trying to say, "Yeah, but how many cases would there be if we didn't have the vaccines"?


Here is the 2021 Covid chart for Israel, the world's most highly vaccinated country:

Israel COVID-19 stats - Realtime coronavirus statistics with charts

You can see cases surging after 80% were fully vaccinated.

Let's say, for the sake of Argument, that the efficacy rate of the Pfizer vaccine is 42%. At a supposed 42% efficacy rate Israel's number of infected rose from near zero on July 1st to over 1 million less than 2 months later and that is with the highest number of vaccinated in the world. Your argument seems to be that, "Yeah, but there would be over 2 million infected but for the efficacy rate of the vaccines. That's the best you can argue? As I said, no one really knows the true efficacy rate and it really doesn't matter because no matter what you say, the number of infected in the world's most vaccinated country has risen from close to zero to over one million people during the time that 80% were fully vaccinated. We need to quit pretending that the vaccinated are not spreading Delta because they are and they are A LOT.

So, as I have been saying all along, we can learn two things from the Israeli graph:

1. The vaccines aren't doing diddly at stopping the spread of Delta because even the vaccinated are spreading Delta

2. The vaccines are extremely effective at cutting down hospitalizations and deaths.

So, trick question here:

If the US could get our vaccination up to the world's best at 80%, what would be the result of that?

Answer, our cases would still be surging

I actually think you presented a really good argument, your conclusion is just flawed. Since you refuse to state what you think the efficacy rate is lets just go with the example you just laid out from the Israel. We can use the 42% rate. As you said, cases rose by 1 million. Without the vaccine cases would have risen 2 million and those cases would have yielded more severe results.

How you conclude that the vaccine does nothing to stop the spread after clearly stating that it prevented 1 million cases in Israel is beyond me. Don't think I can argue with stupid. Its curious though because you don't strike me as a very stupid person. Just extremely hard headed and stubborn.

 

[Independent thinker]

Now you are going broken record on me. I don't care if you don't think it matters or not. I'm just looking for a simple answer about what you think it is. Answer that and then we can debate whether it matters or not.

I just gave you an example! The most vaccinated country on the planet has gone from close to zero infections just a couple of months ago to over one million infections today, with the efficacy rate at whatever it is, and your only argument is, "Yeah, but for the vaccines they would have over two million infections". My argument is that with the vaccines they have gone from close to zero infections to over one million and you are saying that without the vaccine they would have over two million.

 

[Slade3200]

I just gave you an example! The most vaccinated country on the planet has gone from close to zero infections just a couple of months ago to over one million infections today, with the efficacy rate at whatever it is, and your only argument is, "Yeah, but for the vaccines they would have over two million infections". My argument is that with the vaccines they have gone from close to zero infections to over one million and you are saying that without the vaccine they would have over two million.

Thats what you said and what I agreed with. Yes

 

[Independent thinker]

I actually think you presented a really good argument, your conclusion is just flawed. Since you refuse to state what you think the efficacy rate is lets just go with the example you just laid out from the Israel. We can use the 42% rate. As you said, cases rose by 1 million. Without the vaccine cases would have risen 2 million and those cases would have yielded more severe results.

How you conclude that the vaccine does nothing to stop the spread after clearly stating that it prevented 1 million cases in Israel is beyond me. Don't think I can argue with stupid. Its curious though because you don't strike me as a very stupid person. Just extremely hard headed and stubborn.

I have said many times, that the vaccines are not stopping the spread and they are not because with the vaccines in the most highly vaccinated country on the planet infections have risen from close to zero to over one million. Stopping the spread means decreased cases, not increased cases, just as wearing masks does not lead to decreased cases. You are giving people the false delusion that vaccines lead to decreased cases and that the vaccinated do not spread the virus when they do, a lot. This false delusion is contributing to the spread of Delta. Until the left can accept this, infections will continue rising. And, since the vaccinated are spreading Delta, it is WRONG and unjustified to attack the unvaccinated for the spread of Delta when the vaccinated are spreading it too.

 

[Slade3200]

I have said many times, that the vaccines are not stopping the spread and they are not because with the vaccines in the most highly vaccinated country on the planet infections have risen from close to zero to over one million. Stopping the spread means decreased cases, not increased cases, just as wearing masks does not lead to decreased cases. You are giving people the false delusion that vaccines lead to decreased cases and that the vaccinated do not spread the virus when they do, a lot. This false delusion is contributing to the spread of Delta. Until the left can accept this, infections will continue rising. And, since the vaccinated are spreading Delta, it is WRONG and unjustified to attack the unvaccinated for the spread of Delta when the vaccinated are spreading it too.

They were stopping the spread when they were fighting the original strain of the virus that they were designed around. Then a variant came that was more resistant to the the vaccine and cases started spreading again. Data shows that they are spreading at half the rate that they would be spreading if nobody was vaxxed so when you say that the vaccines aren't doing shit you are not being accurate. They are doing shit. They are slowing the spread by a factor of 2.

 

[Independent thinker]

They were stopping the spread when they were fighting the original strain of the virus that they were designed around. Then a variant came that was more resistant to the the vaccine and cases started spreading again. Data shows that they are spreading at half the rate that they would be spreading if nobody was vaxxed so when you say that the vaccines aren't doing shit you are not being accurate. They are doing shit. They are slowing the spread by a factor of 2.

Vaccinated people are spreading the virus. Therefore, it is time to get off the backs of the unvaccinated. Why do we have sports stadiums letting in 55,000 only vaccinated people when, as you say, half of them could be spreading the virus? Why let 27,500 people spread Delta to others, including innocent children under 12? How does that make sense to you? Vaccine passports are giving 55,000 people the delusion that they can go to sporting event and not have to worry about spreading the virus because, hey, they're vacccinated and they get the full support of the left. Sticking it to the unvaccinated is more important to them than a stadium full of 55,000 vaccinated people being a superspreader event. And, your argument is that, "Hey, if we let in the unvaccinated to this stadium, even more cases would result".

 

[Slade3200]

Vaccinated people are spreading the virus. Therefore, it is time to get off the backs of the unvaccinated. Why do we have sports stadiums letting in 55,000 only vaccinated people when, as you say, half of them could be spreading the virus? Why let 27,500 people spread Delta to others, including innocent children under 12? How does that make sense to you? Vaccine passports are giving 55,000 people the delusion that they can go to sporting event and not have to worry about spreading the virus because, hey, they're vacccinated and they get the full support of the left. Sticking it to the unvaccinated is more important to them than a stadium full of 55,000 vaccinated people being a superspreader event. And, your argument is that, "Hey, if we let in the unvaccinated to this stadium, even more cases would result".

Well this is why we see masking requirements coming back and hopefully improved vaccines that work better against delta. Reality is our public will not stand through another shut down so we do the best we can with what we have. But you stating falsehoods like the vaccines don’t do shit against the spread is just wrong

 

[Independent thinker]

Well this is why we see masking requirements coming back and hopefully improved vaccines that work better against delta. Reality is our public will not stand through another shut down so we do the best we can with what we have. But you stating falsehoods like the vaccines don’t do shit against the spread is just wrong

They aren't doing shit because cases are rising even in the most fully vaccinated countries on the planet. And, part of the reason for that is because the left imply that vaccines will cause decreases in cases when they don't, which leads 55,000 people to go out to a sports stadium full of nothing but vaccinated people, thinking that everything is alright because they are all vaccinated. When will the left tell Americans the truth about that?

Why are the left perfectly fine with calling out the right for a Sturgis, SD Bike Rally when they won't call out their very own in thinking that a stadium filled with 55,000 won't be a superspreader event?

And, recent studies have shown that the kinds of masks that the majority of people wear and use have only a 10% efficacy rate, worse than the vaccines. And yet the left will call out the unmasked while oblivious to the fact that most people's masks are only 10% effective. But, hey, they're wearing masks. Doesn't matter what kind, how often they use the same mask, if they wear their masks properly, or follow infection control procedures while putting the masks on or taking them off. Just accuse rising cases on the unmasked and the unvaccinated, even though masked people are spreading the virus and vaccinated people are spreading the virus.

The left attacked Trump for not locking the country down and then when we did have lockdowns, blamed Trump for unemployment and the economy but here you guys are, with cases surging, you yourself admit that our leaders don't want to lock down the country, increasing both unemployment and the economy tanking. Can't have that under Biden. And, mask wearing? Biden took office pleading with Americans for 100 days of mask wearing and yet here we are with cases surging again. Has Biden asked for another 100 days of mask wearing? Many places are now recording the highest number of cases since the pandemic began and yet Biden remains silent about mask wearing. It's all about getting people vaccinated with the Trump vaccine, even though they spent the whole 2020 campaign telling Americans not to get the Trump rushed vaccine.

 

[Slade3200]

They aren't doing shit because cases are rising even in the most fully vaccinated countries on the planet. And, part of the reason for that is because the left imply that vaccines will cause decreases in cases when they don't, which leads 55,000 people to go out to a sports stadium full of nothing but vaccinated people, thinking that everything is alright because they are all vaccinated. When will the left tell Americans the truth about that?

Why are the left perfectly fine with calling out the right for a Sturgis, SD Bike Rally when they won't call out their very own in thinking that a stadium filled with 55,000 won't be a superspreader event?

And, recent studies have shown that the kinds of masks that the majority of people wear and use have only a 10% efficacy rate, worse than the vaccines. And yet the left will call out the unmasked while oblivious to the fact that most people's masks are only 10% effective. But, hey, they're wearing masks. Doesn't matter what kind, how often they use the same mask, if they wear their masks properly, or follow infection control procedures while putting the masks on or taking them off. Just accuse rising cases on the unmasked and the unvaccinated, even though masked people are spreading the virus and vaccinated people are spreading the virus.

The left attacked Trump for not locking the country down and then when we did have lockdowns, blamed Trump for unemployment and the economy but here you guys are, with cases surging, you yourself admit that our leaders don't want to lock down the country, increasing both unemployment and the economy tanking. Can't have that under Biden. And, mask wearing? Biden took office pleading with Americans for 100 days of mask wearing and yet here we are with cases surging again. Has Biden asked for another 100 days of mask wearing? Many places are now recording the highest number of cases since the pandemic began and yet Biden remains silent about mask wearing. It's all about getting people vaccinated with the Trump vaccine, even though they spent the whole 2020 campaign telling Americans not to get the Trump rushed vaccine.

Yup. Cases are rising. And because of the vaccines the spread is going half as fast as it would without the vax. That’s something. Stop spreading falsehoods