skywatch

I’ve actually read a lot of the studies. Lots of them back up the director of the CDC and her statements, later published on notoriously anti-vaccine CNN.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn...day/index.html

this is what she said - quoted - “Our vaccines are working exceptionally well. They continue to work well for Delta with regard to sever illness and death. They prevent it," Walensky said.

"...what they can’t do anymore is prevent transmission. So if you're going home to somebody who has not been vaccinated, somebody who can't get vaccinated... I would suggest you wear a mask in a public indoor setting," Walensky stated.

I never said the vaccines did not do anything. I said the vaccines don’t effectively prevent transmission. On that score, it seems to be me, Rochelle Walensky, the CDC, and most the scientific community on one side and you on the other. Why can’t you just admit that and we can move on?

Tfork

You seem to be slowly modifying your position over time. Here's what you said in Post #194:

You said not remotely effective when the cases are at an all time high after I said they were NOT 100% effective at stopping the spread. Now, I've showed you the CDC study and you've posted the Lancet study ( after saying viral load was an invalid measure) which clearly refutes what you claim and you've shown me nothing that shows the were not even remotely effective and never was it due to the January rise in cases. You are on the other side of the CDC data, not I. If you'd like, I can post the latest study on Omicron.

RI830

Studies abound that will support a particular “narrative”.

Just like watching CNN, MSNBC or FOX to give you confirmation bias……one can find the “peer reviewed” study that matches you vaccine narrative.


Way too much information to come for how these vaccines have worked or not worked and long term effects.

If the average drug commercial has to be discreet about its use and overly fast and dramatic about its side effects….why not the covid vaccines?
We get told to take it and do your part. It’s safe and will stop this pandemic.

Tfork

Yes, she said it after the CDC changed it's mask guidance:

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2...-covid-19.html

As was revealed in your own posting of the Lancet study (or rather the article based off the study), she neglected to mention that although the vaccinated reach the same viral load as the UN-vaccinated in the case of the Delta variant, the viral load reduces faster in the vaccinated.

If lots of studies back up the fact the vaccines are not remotely effective in stopping the spread, show me one.

skywatch

umm, stopping the spread is the same thing as effective at preventing transmission.

My point has been, all along, that vaccination is not an effective tool in stopping the spread or preventing transmission or however you wish to state it. The Director of the CDC said literally the same thing.

I’ll ask it again. Is your position that the vaccines are effective at stopping spread or preventing transmission of COVID-19?

i mean, what do you think the sentence "...what they can’t do anymore is prevent transmission.“ means?

Is it possible you are staring hard at the trees here? Maybe missing something?

skywatch

Man, thick. If a virus Is able to spread from both vaccinated and unvaccinated hosts with about equal ease…to the point that vaccinated hosts are asked to wear masks too…isn’t it obvious?

Tfork

You just want to hang on her words to prove your point while ignoring the conclusions of all the studies. You're making way too many assumptions to come to your conclusion. Let me take another angle to show you the vaccines are somewhat effective at stopping the virus. The data shows you are 2.4 times more likely to get the virus if you are un-vaccinated (14 times more likely to die). That's the CDC data. Now, of course, queue all the usual suspects who are going to say the data is wrong because it doesn't support their tainted view. You can see it here for yourself:

https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tra...vaccine-status


Tell me again how you think it's delusional to say the vaccine is at least somewhat effective in stopping the spread.

Tfork

It's not able to spread with equal ease and the data shows that but you keep on ignoring it. Yes, thick.

skywatch

Effective means it reliably works. Even the thickest of the thick can see that vaccinated people catch Covid-19…all the time.

Is a seatbelt effective at preventing death from your car driving over a 40 story cliff if you have a 2x greater chance of dying without it on? Fun with statistics, courtesy of the propagandists at the CDC, the same folks who agreed we don’t need masks and there is no way it was a lab leaked virus, and feel justified to twist things about anyway they can if it modifies your behavior- end justifies means.

Cmon man. If the director of the CDC says that I should wear a mask, even if I am fully vaccinated, isn’t that enough? By the way, don’t bother answering, these are all rhetorical points, I don’t need another “but I have one study that says”. And for gods sake, don’t even bother with the prevents serious illness-death angle cause I am not arguing that.

I’m not making any assumptions, I can see. I don’t need a meteorologist and a study on environmental factors that determine precipitation if I can look outside and see it is raining. Thick.

Tfork

So now we're down to semantics and the inevitable, predictable disparagement of the data source. A tired old playbook for those who don't have the facts on their side. Deny, deny all you can but the facts say the vaccines are effective in stopping the spread. Not 100% to be sure but effective - the data shows it clearly.