Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

Page 316 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Any thoughts on Halloween trick-or-treaters this year?

I have some Halloween decorations out, and I even bought some candy. But because I don't trust the general population I will just leave the candy out in the driveway.

(So kids, or starving cyclists/artists - help yourself to them. I just don't want you anywhere near my front door.)
With my husband's health issues, no.
 
With my husband's health issues, no.
We had an additional garbage door installed, which is at the street \sidewalk so kids can't get up to the front door..I have tried keeping the lights off..that didn't work..had pretty small kids near 9pm..last year I gave 2 kids everything before going to bed..I am planning on not opening the door..that's my plan..I got some mini Chick-o-sticks and Paydays, Almond Joy..we will see..
US-Mexico border to open November 8th for fully vaccinated..Mexican vaccination cert has a couple of scan codes,not sure how easy it is to forge but looks pretty basic
 
Any thoughts on Halloween trick-or-treaters this year?

I have some Halloween decorations out, and I even bought some candy. But because I don't trust the general population I will just leave the candy out in the driveway.

(So kids, or starving cyclists/artists - help yourself to them. I just don't want you anywhere near my front door.)
I hope that no one makes their kid wear a mask for Halloween because that would be child abuse to force a kid to cover their face! :rolleyes:
 
As a reminder, on planet Maryland, my university requires Kn95 or better for all employees and students. 98%+ are vaccinated.

Masks are still required on public transit. I wear one outside and am not alone.
Why get the Vax if you are going to wear a max outside? Silly to stay scared your entire life one day you got to walk on your own without the stroller.
 
Reactions: FrankB
I'm not putting much credibility on this study. There's a plethora of conflicts of interest with several of the authors disclosing funding/support from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Merck, GSK, Sanofi Pasteur.


There was another study that came out recently also undermining natural immunity vs vaccine immunity that had Pfizer's & AstraZeneca's footprint in the funding disclosure.

Ever since Sen Paul grilled HHS Sec Becerra on the natural immunity issue last month, these studies are appearing promoting vaccine immunity over natural immunity. This is why I believe natural immunity will never be accepted in this country as an alternative to vaccination - it will derail the objective that pharma/CDC/Fauci have in vaccinating every man, woman & child in the U.S.

 
Last edited:
Based on current cases per capita, Alaska has 4x the amount of cases as Vermont now. North Dakota, Wyoming, and Montana have 3x the amount of cases now. Important to differentiate rates from levels. Vermont's spike is to a level equivalent to the current national average.

53%, 50%, 44%, 46%, 73% are the vax rates of those 5. You can probably guess which vaccination rate is Vermont's.
 
I'm not putting much credibility on this study. There's a plethora of conflicts of interest with several of the authors disclosing funding/support from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Merck, GSK, Sanofi Pasteur.


There was another study that came out recently also undermining natural immunity vs vaccine immunity that had Pfizer's & AstraZeneca's footprint in the funding disclosure.

Ever since Sen Paul grilled HHS Sec Becerra on the natural immunity issue last month, these studies are appearing promoting vaccine immunity over natural immunity. This is why I believe natural immunity will never be accepted in this country as an alternative to vaccination - it will derail the objective that pharma/CDC/Fauci have in vaccinating every man, woman & child in the U.S.

Would you agree that no immunity is eternal with this mutating virus? Rand Paul has definitely pressed the issue more for his exposure and less for the benefit of Americans IMO. I read briefly that one of the Kardashians has now gotten infected for the second time along with her kid. If we can't protect these precious National Icons from the virus naturally; what steps should we take. I'm still shaken at the news.....
 
Based on current cases per capita, Alaska has 4x the amount of cases as Vermont now. North Dakota, Wyoming, and Montana have 3x the amount of cases now. Important to differentiate rates from levels. Vermont's spike is to a level equivalent to the current national average.

53%, 50%, 44%, 46%, 73% are the vax rates of those 5. You can probably guess which vaccination rate is Vermont's.
If you look at the CDC data for cases in the State of Vermont this wave of increase started in July and it looks worse than any time in the past when covid started. That seems impossible but its not.

https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#trends_dailycases|New_case|select
Here is the data and all you have to do is select the state of Vermont.
 
Have you read the limitations of this study?

"[...] some patients classified as vaccinated and previously uninfected might also have been infected."

Another thing is, we all know that covid tests aren't 100% accurate, they could be both false positive or false negative - I have no idea why the authors of this study haven't taken this into account and haven't even mentioned this as one of the limitations (imho a very significant one).

The uncertanity of the tests implicates two things:
  • in case of a false positive result in the past, such person was mistakenly identified as the one having natural immunity (unvaccinated group)
  • in case of a false negative result (and if vaccinated) such person was added to vaccinated, non previously infected group
There was 5,1% of positive covid tests in vaccinated group and 8,7% in unvaccinated group. Considering all the limitations (also the one the I mentioned but was not included by the authors), I don't think that's a super credible study and the headlines based on it saying "vaccination induced immunity is 5 times better than the natural one" are very misleading.
 
Reactions: Ultrairon
Have you read the limitations of this study?

"[...] some patients classified as vaccinated and previously uninfected might also have been infected."

Another thing is, we all know that covid tests aren't 100% accurate, they could be both false positive or false negative - I have no idea why the authors of this study haven't taken this into account and haven't even mentioned this as one of the limitations (imho a very significant one).

The uncertanity of the tests implicates two things:
  • in case of a false positive result in the past, such person was mistakenly identified as the one having natural immunity (unvaccinated group)
  • in case of a false negative result (and if vaccinated) such person was added to vaccinated, non previously infected group
There was 5,1% of positive covid tests in vaccinated group and 8,7% in unvaccinated group. Considering all the limitations (also the one the I mentioned but was not included by the authors), I don't think that's a super credible study and the headlines based on it saying "vaccination induced immunity is 5 times better than the natural one" are very misleading.
"Have you read the limitations of this study?"

I posted this here FYI. Each person will take from it what they can, just as you have. Most SARS-CoV-2 research has limitations because its all ongoing. For me, its best to put multiple studies together to get 'answers'.
 
Reactions: jmdirt
"Have you read the limitations of this study?"

I posted this here FYI. Each person will take from it what they can, just as you have. Most SARS-CoV-2 research has limitations because its all ongoing. For me, its best to put multiple studies together to get 'answers'.
My point was, very few people anylyze the limitations of all those studies and how much impact they could have on the results, not even talking about the media, which almost never mention a single word about them.
It may seem obvious for you, but not for most of the people, because it really takes a lot of effort to deeply anylyze every single piece of information. And unfortunately, in case of covid it's highly necessary to do that, cause the narration is very one-sided and there's a lack of a balanced debate especially on the topic of the vaccination.
 
Reactions: Ultrairon
might as well post it, since nobody else has

That's not good!
 
My point was, very few people anylyze the limitations of all those studies and how much impact they could have on the results, not even talking about the media, which almost never mention a single word about them.
It may seem obvious for you, but not for most of the people, because it really takes a lot of effort to deeply anylyze every single piece of information. And unfortunately, in case of covid it's highly necessary to do that, cause the narration is very one-sided and there's a lack of a balanced debate especially on the topic of the vaccination.
I can't be held responsible for other peoples' lack of interest or laziness. I have several sources of information that I trust and when they are 100% aligned its golden. They are rarely too far off from each other, but when they are I try to find out why. I'm not sure what 'narration' you are talking about so I won't comment on that.
 
Reactions: search

ASK THE COMMUNITY