"Pandemic of the unvaccinated" CONFIRMED

well actually wrote:

kibitzer wrote:

In all seriousness: I would love to know more about this, but so far Google has not been helpful. Do you have a link?

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.31.21261387v4.full.pdf

MUCH THANKS for this. I did read through the whole thing but tbh I didn't see anything that indicated "symptomatic vaccinated are *more* likely to spread the virus than asymptomatic unvaccinated." [Emphasis mine.] May I ask you please to point me to the part that led you to that conclusion?

And THANKS again. I mean it: very informative!

kibitzer wrote:

well actually wrote:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.31.21261387v4.full.pdf

MUCH THANKS for this. I did read through the whole thing but tbh I didn't see anything that indicated "symptomatic vaccinated are *more* likely to spread the virus than asymptomatic unvaccinated." [Emphasis mine.] May I ask you please to point me to the part that led you to that conclusion?

And THANKS again. I mean it: very informative!

See Figure C "Asymptomatic", the box shows the average Ct values (lower is worse). The asymptomatic vaccinated group has a lower average than the asymptomatic unvaccinated group. For the symptomatic the average is about the same between the two groups.

I would urge not to read too much into the VERY small study here. Look at the counts in each population. There is certainly good correlation between Ct, viral load, and ability to transmit virus, but many other things matter too. How long do you have high viral load for? What are your respiratory levels? How likely are you to get infected over all?

Here's a study on actual transmission rates in Health Care settings. High vaccinated populations have less hospital acquired cases:

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/8A9B3B1482A6E19A1FF72D1D23246897/S0899823X21004141a.pdf/correlation-of-healthcare-worker-vaccination-on-inpatient-healthcare-associated-covid-19.pdf

But I think my last point is key. It makes sense that breakthrough infections can transmit COVID-19... it's mostly viral load after all.

But to say the vax and unvax populations are equivalent is ignoring the 3-10X lower likelihood of infection when vaccinated. Just look at all the states that track cases by status. Vaccinated people catch COVID far less frequently. They also clear the virus much much fast -> much short infectious period:

Fig 1 here

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261295v1

Anyone that claims vaccinated people are the same risk to a population as unvaccinated people is being willfully disingenuous.

^mic drop

Emily Swanson coming on to yell "stop using the different handles Harambe!" in 3 2 1...

troll_69 wrote:

Emily Swanson coming on to yell "stop using the different handles Harambe!" in 3 2 1...

It reveals how little the antivaxxers have to say about science and data when all they can do is insult the handles.

Anyone reading this thread sees how one-sided the debate is.

Whining and triggered crying on the antivaxxer side, facts and data on ours.

2600 bro wrote:

But to say the vax and unvax populations are equivalent is ignoring the 3-10X lower likelihood of infection when vaccinated.

This is only because they get tested less frequently because they are 1. vaccinated and therefore don't feel the need to be tested and 2. more likely to be asymptomatic. If you look at the numbers in Israel where they are tested heavily you see that the vaccinated test positive just as frequently as the unvaccinated.

As I pointed out, the vaccinated are not only spreading covid the same as the unvaccinated, but they are also responsible for virulent strains of the virus.

Do you ever wonder why the numbers this year of those who test positive are looking like they are going to be higher than last year even though we have a vaccine this year? It is because this is a pandemic of the vaccinated.

Now the death cult are attacking our first responders.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/missouri-hospital-giving-employees-panic-024643472.html

well actually wrote:

kibitzer wrote:

MUCH THANKS for this. I did read through the whole thing but tbh I didn't see anything that indicated "asymptomatic vaccinated are *more* likely to spread the virus than asymptomatic unvaccinated." [Emphasis mine.] May I ask you please to point me to the part that led you to that conclusion?

And THANKS again. I mean it: very informative!

See Figure C "Asymptomatic", the box shows the average Ct values (lower is worse). The asymptomatic vaccinated group has a lower average than the asymptomatic unvaccinated group. For the symptomatic the average is about the same between the two groups.

THANKS again! However, I don't see how that leads us to the conclusion that the asymptomatic vaccinated are "more likely to SPREAD the virus" [emphasis mine] than asymptomatic unvaccinated.

I haven't run a peer-related study, but speaking purely anecdotally (about the Greater NYC area), it seems that the vaccinated--symptomatic or not--are considerably more likely to be masked up, at least indoors, than the unvaccinated.

I've had multiple conversations with those who aren't masked in those situations, and nearly every one is unvaccinated. I realize that's not the way it's "supposed" to be: In mask-optional-for-the-vaccinated situations, anyone without a mask should be a vaccinated person.

But the reality is otherwise: With very few exceptions it's the vaccinated people who are masked and the unvaccinated who are unmasked. In terms of human nature I suppose that makes sense: If you don't "bow" to the get-the-jab received wisdom, you're also the kind of person who's less likely to wear a mask except where absolutely required (and enforced).

Obviously there *are* some "fully vaxxed, not masked" people, but they seem to be really rare. To me this strongly indicates that the vaccinated, symptomatic or asymptomatic, are MUCH less likely to actually *spread the virus* than the unvaccinated.

Once again, thanks for your helpful link and civil posts.

kibitzer wrote:

I haven't run a peer-related study, but speaking purely anecdotally (about the Greater NYC area), it seems that the vaccinated--symptomatic or not--are considerably more likely to be masked up, at least indoors, than the unvaccinated.

I've had multiple conversations with those who aren't masked in those situations, and nearly every one is unvaccinated. I realize that's not the way it's "supposed" to be: In mask-optional-for-the-vaccinated situations, anyone without a mask should be a vaccinated person.

But the reality is otherwise: With very few exceptions it's the vaccinated people who are masked and the unvaccinated who are unmasked. In terms of human nature I suppose that makes sense: If you don't "bow" to the get-the-jab received wisdom, you're also the kind of person who's less likely to wear a mask except where absolutely required (and enforced).

I'm in NYC and have observed this. But to add, it seems that the vaccinated are more likely to be getting tested as well! People who don't wear masks and aren't vaccinated are -not- getting tested in significant numbers, except when they go to the emergency room.

Show me recent Israeli data that confirms this.

This is all I can fimd

This seem to be the best source. But my hebrew is terrible:

The very first chart on the page is "חולים פעילים - גיל והתחסנות" or active cases, age and immunization.

Change the settings to "ל-100 אלף תושבים" or "per 100,000 inhabitants" and you see that there is > 2-3X the rate of cases among the unvax than the vaccinated and and > 5X among the boosted population.

Curious where you get your data from?

Yep again big deal. There’s probably also about a 1,000,000 to 1 ratio between the unhealthy underlying condition non vaxxed and the healthy low risk non vaxxed. Can you get to the point fool? I did. One sentence.

^of course I’m probably giving too much credit to you sick puppies. The odds are probably closer to 10,000,000 to 1 but your sources are too afraid to tell you the truth. Keep pumping that crap at your peril.

And out of all of your blah blah blah data this data that posts, I just gave you the only data that matters.

Noyankee wrote:

And out of all of your blah blah blah data this data that posts, I just gave you the only data that matters.

Tacit admission that the vaccine works and you just want to change the subject.

The vaccine is a better risk:reward for all groups. Only the innumerate are still holding out fantasies that avoiding the vaccine makes sense. Clearly you are among them.

I will send you a 7th grade math textbook free of charge. My treat.

Harambe wrote:

Noyankee wrote:

And out of all of your blah blah blah data this data that posts, I just gave you the only data that matters.

Tacit admission that the vaccine works and you just want to change the subject.

The vaccine is a better risk:reward for all groups. Only the innumerate are still holding out fantasies that avoiding the vaccine makes sense. Clearly you are among them.

I will send you a 7th grade math textbook free of charge. My treat.

Woah woah woah, 7th grade? That's big boy math!

First it would need to be determined that masking does anything to prevent the spread. I have not seen a real world study done on covid that has been able to make this conclusion. The largest randomized controlled trial study done on masks was from Denmark and it could not conclude that wearing masks made any statistical difference. Also not long ago there was a chart that showed all of the school districts in Florida that had a mask mandate in 2020 vs the ones that did not. The districts that had a mask mandate had no difference in the number of cases than the ones that didn't have a mask mandate.

Even if it was concluded that masks made a difference then you would need evidence that it makes enough of a difference that it would offset the likeliness to spread the virus.

well actually wrote:

First it would need to be determined that masking does anything to prevent the spread. I have not seen a real world study done on covid that has been able to make this conclusion. The largest randomized controlled trial study done on masks was from Denmark and it could not conclude that wearing masks made any statistical difference. Also not long ago there was a chart that showed all of the school districts in Florida that had a mask mandate in 2020 vs the ones that did not. The districts that had a mask mandate had no difference in the number of cases than the ones that didn't have a mask mandate.

Even if it was concluded that masks made a difference then you would need evidence that it makes enough of a difference that it would offset the likeliness to spread the virus.

1) actual evidence of transmission and infection (not just Ct values) shows vaccinated people get the disease less, clear it faster, and likely spread it less. More data to come but a refutation of your central argument has already been done in the last few posts

2) There was a massive study in Bangladesh done with 350000 people that shows masking has a community benefit:

This was a cluster RCT = high quality evidence!

More data from this trial yet to read out.

Denmark study is basically superseded as they didn’t even look at source control.

You seem committed to believing the vax doesn’t help, unclear why antivaxxers now seem to be HOPING for vaccine failure. Odd