17 May 21
The CDC has lied before siting a study that does not exist. Redfield falsely claimed a mask offered more protection than a vaccine.
Walenski claimed it did only to walk back on those statements.
https://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-vaccination-comments-director-rochelle-walensky-2021-4?op=1
It doesn't seem to matter who the director of the CDC is. The lying and misleading statements continue.
What does the CDC study really say? Where is it? Inquiring minds who have been lied to want to know.
Another lie?
17 May 21
@metal-brain saidYou don’t need a study, you just follow the drop in infection rates alongside the rise in vaccination rates. It’s called cause and effect.
The CDC has lied before siting a study that does not exist. Redfield falsely claimed a mask offered more protection than a vaccine.
Walenski claimed it did only to walk back on those statements.
https://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-vaccination-comments-director-rochelle-walensky-2021-4?op=1
It doesn't seem to matter who the director of the CDC is. The lying and ...[text shortened]... C study really say? Where is it? Inquiring minds who have been lied to want to know.
Another lie?
Most people are not simple or disingenuous enough not to figure this out for themselves.
17 May 21
@metal-brain saidMr. Metal Brain - I know it's fun to spread your deep state, conspiracy theory nonsense near and far, but you might want to take a long, hard look at the amount of people dying each week in America as of 6 months ago, and look at that figure now. Vaccines have drastically reduced the number deaths. In addition, the Biden administration took over this pandemic from an administration that insisted that it was all a "hoax", it would "simply vanish", zapping yourself with UV rays and ingesting household cleansers were the answers to combating this pandemic.
The CDC has lied before siting a study that does not exist. Redfield falsely claimed a mask offered more protection than a vaccine.
Walenski claimed it did only to walk back on those statements.
https://www.businessinsider.com/cdc-vaccination-comments-director-rochelle-walensky-2021-4?op=1
It doesn't seem to matter who the director of the CDC is. The lying and ...[text shortened]... C study really say? Where is it? Inquiring minds who have been lied to want to know.
Another lie?
Here's a thought Spanky - Why don't you let people who actually know things about medicine (You know - those with medical degrees) deal with this pandemic, and stop trying to play armchair quarterback. The drastically reduced death rate would indicate the Biden administration has done a reasonably good job of dealing with this crisis.
@kevcvs57 saidOf course, there isn't a study "proving no spread". No vaccine ever invented has 100% efficiency.
You don’t need a study, you just follow the drop in infection rates alongside the rise in vaccination rates. It’s called cause and effect.
Most people are not simple or disingenuous enough not to figure this out for themselves.
But there are several studies showing significantly reduced possibility of transmission after the vaccines:
"In April, Public Health England reported the results of a large study of COVID-19 transmission involving more than 365,000 households with a mix of vaccinated and unvaccinated members.
It found immunisation with either the Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccine reduced the chance of onward virus transmission by 40-60%. This means that if someone became infected after being vaccinated, they were only around half as likely to pass their infection on to others compared to infected people who weren’t vaccinated."
"One study from Israel, which leads the world in coronavirus vaccinations, gives some clues about what’s behind this reduced transmission. Researchers identified nearly 5,000 cases of breakthrough infection in previously vaccinated people, and determined how much virus was present in their nose swabs. Compared to unvaccinated people, the amount of virus detected was significantly lower in those who got vaccinated.
More virus in the nose has been linked to greater infectiousness and increased risks of onward transmission.
These studies show vaccination is likely to substantially reduce virus transmission by reducing the pool of people who become infected, and reducing virus levels in the nose in people with breakthrough infections."
https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/mounting-evidence-suggests-covid-vaccines-do-reduce-transmission-how-does-work
17 May 21
@metal-brain said"Our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus".
Walenski claimed it did only to walk back on those statements.
Do you see anything wrong with simply discussing what data shows? If Walenski is truly just presenting facts gathered up to that point, there's no problem with her comment.
Where is the vaccine study proving no spread?
That's not purely up to the vaccine. There are too many conservatives like yourself who either refuse to get vaccinated or believe COVID-19 is nothing more than a flu. A vaccine can't fix stupid.
17 May 21
@mchill saidIt is not a conspiracy theory. Here is my source, the CDC. Here is an excerpt from the CDC link below:
Mr. Metal Brain - I know it's fun to spread your deep state, conspiracy theory nonsense near and far, but you might want to take a long, hard look at the amount of people dying each week in America as of 6 months ago, and look at that figure now. Vaccines have drastically reduced the number deaths. In addition, the Biden administration took over this pandemic from an administr ...[text shortened]... would indicate the Biden administration has done a reasonably good job of dealing with this crisis.
"As of May 1, 2021, CDC transitioned from monitoring all reported vaccine breakthrough cases to focus on identifying and investigating only hospitalized or fatal cases due to any cause. This shift will help maximize the quality of the data collected on cases of greatest clinical and public health importance."
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/breakthrough-cases.html
The CDC changed the way they count cases, but only for the vaccinated. This is clear data manipulation. You are not supposed to compare apples to oranges. You are supposed to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges, unless your goal is data manipulation.
I posted the information on my thread "CDC data manipulation" from a CHD link. Didn't read it, did you?
@no1marauder saidHere is my source, the CDC. Here is an excerpt from the CDC link below:
Of course, there isn't a study "proving no spread". No vaccine ever invented has 100% efficiency.
But there are several studies showing significantly reduced possibility of transmission after the vaccines:
"In April, Public Health England reported the results of a large study of COVID-19 transmission involving more than 365,000 households with a mix of vacci ...[text shortened]... gavi.org/vaccineswork/mounting-evidence-suggests-covid-vaccines-do-reduce-transmission-how-does-work
"As of May 1, 2021, CDC transitioned from monitoring all reported vaccine breakthrough cases to focus on identifying and investigating only hospitalized or fatal cases due to any cause. This shift will help maximize the quality of the data collected on cases of greatest clinical and public health importance."
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/breakthrough-cases.html
The CDC changed the way they count cases, but only for the vaccinated. This is clear data manipulation. You are not supposed to compare apples to oranges. You are supposed to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges, unless your goal is data manipulation.
I posted the information on my thread "CDC data manipulation" from a CHD link. Didn't read it, did you?
Also, this is from page 4 of the "Impact of vaccination on household transmission of SARS-COV-2 in England" study you provided:
"Known institutional settings (using UPRN information) such as care homes, prisons, and households with more than 10 residents are excluded."
Why did they exclude care homes, prisons, and households with more than 10 residents?
17 May 21
@metal-brain saidAs usual, you don't know what you are talking about. A "vaccine breakthrough case" is defined as "For the purpose of this surveillance, a vaccine breakthrough infection is defined as the detection of SARS-COV-2 RNA or antigen in a respiratory specimen collected from a person ≥14 days after they have completed all recommended doses of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-authorized COVID-19 vaccine."
Here is my source, the CDC. Here is an excerpt from the CDC link below:
"As of May 1, 2021, CDC transitioned from monitoring all reported vaccine breakthrough cases to focus on identifying and investigating only hospitalized or fatal cases due to any cause. This shift will help maximize the quality of the data collected on cases of greatest clinical and public health i ...[text shortened]... excluded."
Why did they exclude care homes, prisons, and households with more than 10 residents?
That's right above the sentence you quote out of context.
So, of course, all those cases are of people already vaccinated, so your objection makes no sense.
17 May 21
@metal-brain saidWhy were institutional settings omitted from a study titled "Impact of vaccination on household transmission of SARS-COV-2 in England"?
Here is my source, the CDC. Here is an excerpt from the CDC link below:
"As of May 1, 2021, CDC transitioned from monitoring all reported vaccine breakthrough cases to focus on identifying and investigating only hospitalized or fatal cases due to any cause. This shift will help maximize the quality of the data collected on cases of greatest clinical and public health i ...[text shortened]... excluded."
Why did they exclude care homes, prisons, and households with more than 10 residents?
Gee, that's a real puzzle, MB.
17 May 21
@no1marauder saidWRONG!
As usual, you don't know what you are talking about. A "vaccine breakthrough case" is defined as "For the purpose of this surveillance, a vaccine breakthrough infection is defined as the detection of SARS-COV-2 RNA or antigen in a respiratory specimen collected from a person ≥14 days after they have completed all recommended doses of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (F ...[text shortened]...
So, of course, all those cases are of people already vaccinated, so your objection makes no sense.
Here is the part of the excerpt you ignored:
"As of May 1, 2021, CDC transitioned from monitoring all reported vaccine breakthrough cases to focus on identifying and investigating only hospitalized or fatal cases due to any cause."
Do you understand the difference between "all reported vaccine breakthrough cases" and "only hospitalized or fatal cases due to any cause"?
I think you read only what you want to believe. Try to read properly from now on.
17 May 21
@no1marauder saidSo, of course, all those cases are of people already vaccinated, so your objection makes no sense.
As usual, you don't know what you are talking about. A "vaccine breakthrough case" is defined as "For the purpose of this surveillance, a vaccine breakthrough infection is defined as the detection of SARS-COV-2 RNA or antigen in a respiratory specimen collected from a person ≥14 days after they have completed all recommended doses of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (F ...[text shortened]...
So, of course, all those cases are of people already vaccinated, so your objection makes no sense.
He often makes no sense, but he sounds very "official" while doing it. 😏
17 May 21
@no1marauder saidHouseholds with more than 10 residents are excluded. DUH!
Why were institutional settings omitted from a study titled "Impact of vaccination on household transmission of SARS-COV-2 in England"?
Gee, that's a real puzzle, MB.
You mean not all household transmission. Shouldn't it be called "Impact of vaccination on households with 10 residents or less"?
That is a puzzle, selective reading man.
@metal-brain saidThey don't count the unvaccinated at all in stats regarding "vaccine breakthroughs".
No, they are ONLY those that are vaccinated. They count the unvaccinated differently.
You make no sense.
The section you keep quoting from is clearly labelled:
"Identifying and investigating hospitalized or fatal vaccine breakthrough cases"
Why you think it includes unvaccinated persons is a mystery.
@Metal-Brain
Tell me, what do you hope to gain by all this trolling bullshyte?
Do you think you are disassembling the world of science, where you are ALWAYS right and real scientists, you know, those guys who dedicated 30 odd years getting a Phd in their field, of COURSE those guys don't know their ass from a hole in the ground, since all they want is to advance up the political side of science, right?
All they want is some million dollar research grant so they don't have to do a REAL job, right?