From mid-July through mid-December, the proportion of fully vaccinated adults in Los Angeles County increased nearly 20 percent, from approximately 65 percent to 77 percent, but the proportion of COVID-19 hospitalizations occurring in fully vaccinated adults increased almost 60 percent, from approximately 25 percent to 40 percent.
The CDC also noted that while some reports indicated omicron was causing less severe illness compared to delta, most patients hospitalized during the early omicron period still suffered from severe lower respiratory illness.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) analysis of a single hospital in Los Angeles found there were more hospitalizations during omicron compared to delta, but that among omicron-period patients, vaccination - particularly vaccination plus a booster dose - was associated with lower likelihood of admission to an intensive care unit.
I like it. Let's go Darwin!In case anyone missed it
if you die from a preventable illness in modern times due to your stubborn opinion then people have every right to criticize and even mock your death.In case anyone missed it
Hopefully they figured out we aren’t their target audience.Speaking of karma, anyone seen our resident anti-vaxx assholes around here lately?
She ran a Monte Carlo simulation.Here's another one who didn't get vaccinated and who had a heart condition. She should have got the vaccine.
Her BIL said "Not harping on vaccination, but I truly believe if she was vaccinated, it wouldn’t have been such a life-altering situation,” Monte Carlo said."
After work, I came home and I found your post (#3873) to clear up your false accusation of me lying in your prior post, and to clear up the question if my memory is off. Specially since you didn't have the integrity to present the post. Take note of the bold type, specifically the underlined part, in what YOU Wrote:
Do you even comprehend what you said there? Even though you dressed it up as under 18s being vaccinated indiscriminately, what you said there means vaccines are not accepted science world wide. You can't single out part of the science, or a particular age group and state it's not an acceptable science worldwide, and then try to claim you never said vaccinations aren't accepted science worldwide because that is exactly what you did for a particular age group (under 18s). Unless you try to ignore the under 18 year old's, that you made your claim about. Under 18 year old's being vaccinated is part of the very science you are trying to manipulate.
It doesn't matter how you dress it up or try to back peddle, I'm not the one who lied here, nor is their a problem with my memory. Either you are the deliberately trying to be dishonest with your false accusations. Or, you not only fail at comprehending what other's say in their posts, you can't even comprehend what you type in your own damn posts.. And you wonder why I call you an idiot! It is purely all about your stupidity in your posts, and nothing to do with anger.
Guys he GOT the SHOT. All he’s trying to say is [insert anti-vax lie].This right here proves you are dumb as a rock, or disingenuous, you pick. We're talking about COVID vaccines, not ALL vaccines. Honestly, I can't believe you'd be THAT stupid, so you're just trying to be clever here. Facts is, vaccination all kids against COVID isn't accepted science. As a matter of FACT, Sweden decided against it.
Sweden decides against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-11
Sweden has decided against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-11, the Health Agency said on Thursday, arguing that the benefits did not outweigh the risks.www.reuters.com
With all due respect allisolm, he can't talk about covidiots because he can't bring himself to talk about himself. I mean a person arguing about the COVID vaccine, in the manner in which he has done, is just a path to recruit and/or breed Covidiots.This right here proves you are dumb as a rock, or disingenuous, you pick. We're talking about COVID vaccines, not ALL vaccines. Honestly, I can't believe you'd be THAT stupid, so you're just trying to be clever here. Facts is, vaccination all kids against COVID isn't accepted science. As a matter of FACT, Sweden decided against it.
Sweden decides against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-11
Sweden has decided against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-11, the Health Agency said on Thursday, arguing that the benefits did not outweigh the risks.www.reuters.com
You have been told numerous times to stay out of this thread unless you are talking about actual covidiots. Yet here you are posting in this thread again, but NOT about covidiots. "Honestly, I can't believe you'd be THAT stupid", but apparently you are.
Administrator allisolm
The short answer is that the right will always go against anything the "left" is for.I've always long wondered...if COVID (or whatever the next global pandemic is) had like a 50% all age mortality, would the right still be against vaccine and mask mandates?
I've always long wondered...if COVID (or whatever the next global pandemic is) had like a 50% all age mortality, would the right still be against vaccine and mask mandates?
Like real talk, if it's a mass extinction level thing like that...and a 50% death rate is probably pushing the boundaries of that.... it's going to be more along the lines of what you see post hurricane or other extreme weather event. At that level of loss core infrastructure is going to fall...power, utilities, supply chain. Ect. People are going to be looting for diapers, water and food and to survive. Politics are out the window and it's down to some basic survival. Mask mandates will be the least of our worries. Are you going to have someone trying to break into your house for basic rations.
Spanish flu was pretty damn virulent. Ebola kills probably around 50%. HIV was 100% before modern meds and it spread just fine. The caveat was it was really delicate and relatively difficult to transmit comparatively.I just can't really fathom the full cascade of events. That said, I'm not sure viruses can really get that lethal as they kill off their vectors too fast.
Most viruses that spread that easily aren't that deadly but there's no evolutionary pressure that couple virulence with transmissability.
If you initially just plot disease deadliness vs infectiousness, then there is not any correlation. But, if you look longer at the graph, you see a region that is excluded. There are no known diseases with both a high fatality rate and high transmission (yet). See the upper right corner of the graph below. It is empty. But the lower left corner is quite busy with no correlation. You could draw a diagonal line from top left to bottom right and few diseases ever cross that line. When they do, it isn't far past the line.
The reason is that if the disease kills before it spreads, then not many people will ever be infected and thus few would be killed. So, while it is theoretically possible to have a disease be both highly deadly and highly infectious, the disease would need to have a delayed death function. It would need to multiply fast, spread fast, then delay, then kill.
A delay function would probably be complex. Evolution tends to form more streamlined diseases to spread faster. There is no evolutionary pressure to develop and keep any delayed death functionality since it has already done its job at spreading. It certainly can happen, but there is no reason for that to ever evolve.