Science is now cancelled? [USERS NOW BANNED FOR POLITICS]

[K4fxd]

On a global scale?

Ummm, no. We have a northern and a southern hemisphere. When it is warm in one it is cold in the other. This due to the tilt of the earth and the distance change from the sun due to the orbit.

The tilt changes due to wobble, like a top slowing down and the orbit is not stabil, it looks like what a spiral graph would draw on multiple passes.

Sponsored

 

[CJJon]

Ummm, no. We have a northern and a southern hemisphere. When it is warm in one it is cold in the other. This due to the tilt of the earth and the distance change from the sun due to the orbit.

The tilt changes due to wobble, like a top slowing down and the orbit is not stabil, it looks like what a spiral graph would draw on multiple passes.

I know how it all works. You won't believe it, but I actually taught Astronomy at the college level many years ago.

So the prediction of colder and more snow is just for the Northern Hemisphere?

 

[Hobohunter]

No real surprise and battery electric alternatives are as good if not better than petrol now. We have a battery Husqvarna chainsaw and brushcutter to replace the old petrol ones. Same power, quieter and a lot less smelly.

The only real problem I see with this is that California already has trouble supplying enough electrical power, adding in tons of battery chargers isn't going to help. All California is really doing when they do things like this is importing more power from out of state, which really only exports their own carbon footprint. It'd be one thing if California added a bunch of baseload nuclear instead of shutting it all down.

 

[sk47]

There are and I have copied the link below the table for deaths. Within 21 days of first dose the vaccine will have minimal effect so effectively unvaccinated in practice. I think the results speak for themselves of the dramatic benefit of vaccination on death rates. I find it impossible to comprehend how anybody can be antivax with data like this?

Vaccination status	Deaths involving COVID-19	Non-COVID-19 deaths	COVID-19 deaths as percent of all deaths
All deaths regardless of vaccination status	51,281	214,701	19.3
Unvaccinated	38,964	65,170	37.4
Deaths within 21 days of first dose	4,388	14,265	23.5
Deaths 21 days or more after first dose	7,289	66,533	9.9
Deaths within 21 days of second dose	182	11,470	1.6
Deaths 21 days or more after second dose	458	57,263	0.8

COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report - week 37 (publishing.service.gov.uk)

You need to read this carefully and understand that as the vaccination rates are very high in the UK inevitably more and more cases will in vaccinated people, if everybody was vaccinated then all cases would be in vaccinated people. However the overall rate of cases in vaccinated groups is lower. In the younger age group where there are currently more unvaccinated people the rate is about 3 times less if vaccinated compared to unvaccinated. There are very few unvaccinated people in the older age groups so data will be less reliable now.

Hello; Just did a quick check on a calculator. I subtracted the 38,964 unvaccinated deaths from the 51,281 total of all deaths regardless of vaxx status. I used the deaths involving covid19 column.
I get 12,317 deaths which appear to be of the vaccinated ( those with shots). So you are correct in that roughly a third of the total deaths involving covid19 are of those with shots.

I have not tried to do the numbers for adults only. Based on some data posted here a while back the death rate for the young worked out to be at 2 per million ( something like 0.02 per 100,000 of population)( that would be something like 0.00002% if my math is correct)

So it would seem deaths for the very young are not a significant number in terms of the math only. ( not implying the deaths do not count emotionally)

Looking at the deaths using a 95% vaccinated number those 12,317 deaths take on a different tone. The unvaccinated still have the larger number of deaths to be sure which is to be expected as they do not have any protection. That the vaccinated who have protection from the shots have around a full one third of the current deaths puts a different light on the situation.

The breakthrough infections resulting in deaths for the vaccinated seems a significant number. This is over 18 months into the pandemic with advances in clinical support treatment which better help keep the more serious cases alive. ( I do not know if the UK refuses treatment to the unvaccinated as has been suggested in this thread a few times.)

Guess it depends on how the numbers are looked at. If the 95% vaccinated number is a good one in terms of herd immunity, or even if the 70% number is used, then the virus ought to be having a hard time finding unvaccinated people to infect. That so many of the vaccinated are dying must should also mean a lot of others among the vaccinated are getting sick and shedding the virus. Brings into question how useful the shots will be in stopping the pandemic. Guess we are back to the outcome being I might not get as ill with the shots.
With an overall survival rate over 98% even when the elderly are lumped in the picture for the shots is less than great, depending on how you look at it.

 

[sk47]

You didn't respond to the questions in my post but just had a little rant again about natural immunity. Here it is again for you. Need a yes or no answer please.

What is your policy advice. Vaccinate or not after natural infection, because as a government there has to be a policy. It cannot be open ended, get vaccinated if you feel like it - far too woolly. So do you advise people to NOT get vaccinated if they had COVID - when they then later die of COVID that is going to look like a pretty brave policy, and I can assure you bravery and medicine / lawyers make poor bedfellows.

Hello; I actually did answer this question, but not with a yes or no.

 

[Gregs24]

The only real problem I see with this is that California already has trouble supplying enough electrical power, adding in tons of battery chargers isn't going to help. All California is really doing when they do things like this is importing more power from out of state, which really only exports their own carbon footprint. It'd be one thing if California added a bunch of baseload nuclear instead of shutting it all down.

I can't comment on infrastructure in the US, although the charger for this sort of battery is very low power. Even commercial users over here are using battery based stuff now, with batteries that will last all day (assuming the user can!)

 

[Gregs24]

Hello; Just did a quick check on a calculator. I subtracted the 38,964 unvaccinated deaths from the 51,281 total of all deaths regardless of vaxx status. I used the deaths involving covid19 column.
I get 12,317 deaths which appear to be of the vaccinated ( those with shots). So you are correct in that roughly a third of the total deaths involving covid19 are of those with shots.

I have not tried to do the numbers for adults only. Based on some data posted here a while back the death rate for the young worked out to be at 2 per million ( something like 0.02 per 100,000 of population)( that would be something like 0.00002% if my math is correct)

So it would seem deaths for the very young are not a significant number in terms of the math only. ( not implying the deaths do not count emotionally)

Looking at the deaths using a 95% vaccinated number those 12,317 deaths take on a different tone. The unvaccinated still have the larger number of deaths to be sure which is to be expected as they do not have any protection. That the vaccinated who have protection from the shots have around a full one third of the current deaths puts a different light on the situation.

The breakthrough infections resulting in deaths for the vaccinated seems a significant number. This is over 18 months into the pandemic with advances in clinical support treatment which better help keep the more serious cases alive. ( I do not know if the UK refuses treatment to the unvaccinated as has been suggested in this thread a few times.)

Guess it depends on how the numbers are looked at. If the 95% vaccinated number is a good one in terms of herd immunity, or even if the 70% number is used, then the virus ought to be having a hard time finding unvaccinated people to infect. That so many of the vaccinated are dying must should also mean a lot of others among the vaccinated are getting sick and shedding the virus. Brings into question how useful the shots will be in stopping the pandemic. Guess we are back to the outcome being I might not get as ill with the shots.
With an overall survival rate over 98% even when the elderly are lumped in the picture for the shots is less than great, depending on how you look at it.

Ahh but the crucial point is those one third come from 95% of the adults, but the two thirds come from 5% of the adults (unvaccinated) - that is a very much higher percentage. This is what I was saying about when you have 100% vaccinated 100% of deaths will be of vaccinated people, but FAR FEWER overall. If you scale up the two thirds deaths from 5% of the population to 100% of the population (pre vaccine) you can see why we would be in a real mess without the vaccine.

The vaccine has been very effective, nothing to question. They have saved millions of lives.

 

[Gregs24]

Hello; I actually did answer this question, but not with a yes or no.

I'm afraid that is not an option. It has to be yes or no. Do you advise people that have had COVID to get vaccinated? Simple question. You have the information, you know that having COVID does not mean long lasting immunity or the presence of neutralising antibodies. The government want an answer from you because they have got to advise these people what to do in clear simple terms.

Yes or No?

 

[Hobohunter]

I can't comment on infrastructure in the US, although the charger for this sort of battery is very low power. Even commercial users over here are using battery based stuff now, with batteries that will last all day (assuming the user can!)

Oh, I know they don't take a lot of power, but there will be a lot of them so it will increase strain on the grid.

 

[Gregs24]

Oh, I know they don't take a lot of power, but there will be a lot of them so it will increase strain on the grid.

Obviously it all adds up. That comes down to infrastructure planning which is a whole can of worms in the US it seems! We pay a lot more for our electricity than you do (so do most European countries) because it seems our infrastructure investment is better. Cheap power comes at a cost long term.

 

[sk47]

Ahh but the crucial point is those one third come from 95% of the adults, but the two thirds come from 5% of the adults (unvaccinated) - that is a very much higher percentage. This is what I was saying about when you have 100% vaccinated 100% of deaths will be of vaccinated people, but FAR FEWER overall. If you scale up the two thirds deaths from 5% of the population to 100% of the population (pre vaccine) you can see why we would be in a real mess without the vaccine.

The vaccine has been very effective, nothing to question. They have saved millions of lives.

Hello; Ok so we are using the 95% vaccination rate. Good. That should be well above any herd immunity numbers I have seen. ( of course that is a moving number for some in authority. )

I did not miss the point you are trying to make. That if all are vaccinated then any illness and deaths would have to be from among the vaccinated. I get it. If everyone drove a Ford then all traffic accidents would involve a Ford. Would not necessarily make all Fords safe to drive.

The bigger question could be if the shots are so "very effective, nothing to question" then why is the pandemic still going on in a country with 95% having the shots. Should be well above any reasonable herd immunity number. You should be at the end of the pandemic. The 5% of adults ( oh wait; are the children counted among the unvaccinated?) ought to be harder for the vaccine to find if 95% of the population around them are vaccinated. Is that happening?

Looks like your country is on the way to 100% vaccinated if you get the power to force the shots on children. Guess we will see how things play out then.

 

[sk47]

I'm afraid that is not an option. It has to be yes or no. Do you advise people that have had COVID to get vaccinated? Simple question. You have the information, you know that having COVID does not mean long lasting immunity or the presence of neutralising antibodies. The government want an answer from you because they have got to advise these people what to do in clear simple terms.

Yes or No?

Hello; You do not get to make the rules, nor will I allow you to force me into such an answer. The naturally immune get to decide for themselves. The unvaccinated get to decide for themselves. The authorities do not get to decide for them
The authorities get to make a case for the shots as best they can. We individuals get to weigh the choices and make a decision. I did so for my particular circumstance. Being old with two comorbidities helped me to decide. Having a negative covid19 antibody test helped me decide. I freely decided to take the shots and did accept the possibility of an unknown risk from the shots.
The shots did hurt me in a few ways and I will not take a third shot for those reasons and for having a better understanding of how the shots work.

If it gets down to it and I have to decide to give up my freedom to make my own health care choices and comply to authorities wishes, my thinking at this point is to keep my freedom of choice. I can be led but will not be pushed so easy. There will come a point when some one will have to hold me down and inject me by force. That state of affairs does not seem so far away today.

There is a use of force behind the current vaccine mandates no matter how the spin goes. The list of force measures is long, as is the list of punishments. Saw this morning that Seattle is near to losing so many police officers when the shot mandates take effect in a few days that they will not be able to do basic police business.

Pile on top of all this is the very leaky nature of the shots. It does not raise much comment when I say my best hope after the two shots is I may be less seriously ill when I am infected. Even a less serious illness is not for sure. I can get seriously ill and can die with two shots. We know the general numbers of survival for the unvaccinated at over 98% if you throw in the old. Well over 99% if the old are left out.
What is the survival rate of the vaccinated who get infected? Is it very much better. Is it something like 99.999 % survival for those with the shot? Since i am likely to be infected such would be nice to know. That number has not shown up in my searches so far.

 

[Gregs24]

Hello; Ok so we are using the 95% vaccination rate. Good. That should be well above any herd immunity numbers I have seen. ( of course that is a moving number for some in authority. )

I did not miss the point you are trying to make. That if all are vaccinated then any illness and deaths would have to be from among the vaccinated. I get it. If everyone drove a Ford then all traffic accidents would involve a Ford. Would not necessarily make all Fords safe to drive.

The bigger question could be if the shots are so "very effective, nothing to question" then why is the pandemic still going on in a country with 95% having the shots. Should be well above any reasonable herd immunity number. You should be at the end of the pandemic. The 5% of adults ( oh wait; are the children counted among the unvaccinated?) ought to be harder for the vaccine to find if 95% of the population around them are vaccinated. Is that happening?

Looks like your country is on the way to 100% vaccinated if you get the power to force the shots on children. Guess we will see how things play out then.

of course that is a moving number for some in authority Why did you find the need to say this. I have explained how the % required for herd immunity is calculated and why it varies - nothing to do with those in 'authority'

There are no children under 12 vaccinated and only about 40% under 18 vaccinated so still plenty of hosts. 95% of 'adults' are vaccinated. As I have mentioned several times we have no mandatory restriction here in England and the pandemic is not a pandemic now, it is endemic. The R0 is currently around 1.

As you know the vaccine does not prevent transmission (it drastically reduces it) so some vaccinated people will still carry the virus. This isn't going to be a case of reach 'herd immunity' and the disease goes away unlike with some conditions. But you know all this.

if you get the power to force the shots on children No mandatory vaccination in the UK just very good voluntary uptake by intelligent well informed people.

 

[Gregs24]

Hello; You do not get to make the rules, nor will I allow you to force me into such an answer. The naturally immune get to decide for themselves. The unvaccinated get to decide for themselves. The authorities do not get to decide for them
The authorities get to make a case for the shots as best they can. We individuals get to weigh the choices and make a decision. I did so for my particular circumstance. Being old with two comorbidities helped me to decide. Having a negative covid19 antibody test helped me decide. I freely decided to take the shots and did accept the possibility of an unknown risk from the shots.
The shots did hurt me in a few ways and I will not take a third shot for those reasons and for having a better understanding of how the shots work.

If it gets down to it and I have to decide to give up my freedom to make my own health care choices and comply to authorities wishes, my thinking at this point is to keep my freedom of choice. I can be led but will not be pushed so easy. There will come a point when some one will have to hold me down and inject me by force. That state of affairs does not seem so far away today.

There is a use of force behind the current vaccine mandates no matter how the spin goes. The list of force measures is long, as is the list of punishments. Saw this morning that Seattle is near to losing so many police officers when the shot mandates take effect in a few days that they will not be able to do basic police business.

Pile on top of all this is the very leaky nature of the shots. It does not raise much comment when I say my best hope after the two shots is I may be less seriously ill when I am infected. Even a less serious illness is not for sure. I can get seriously ill and can die with two shots. We know the general numbers of survival for the unvaccinated at over 98% if you throw in the old. Well over 99% if the old are left out.
What is the survival rate of the vaccinated who get infected? Is it very much better. Is it something like 99.999 % survival for those with the shot? Since i am likely to be infected such would be nice to know. That number has not shown up in my searches so far.

You do not get to make the rules, nor will I allow you to force me into such an answer. The naturally immune get to decide for themselves. The unvaccinated get to decide for themselves. The authorities do not get to decide for them. There was no need to write all the other guff you have on copy / paste.

These ARE the rules. Governments employ advisers who have to give advice and then they act upon it. The question is a simple one, should we advise people to be vaccinated or not based on the information we / you have. It is all very well you saying the 'naturally immune' decide for themselves, but how do they know they are naturally immune when you know that they may not be post recovery. All information you know that has been provided to you, so what is your advice to them ? The authorities are not deciding for them, they are advising together with healthcare professionals.

It seems you like to moan and criticise, but when it comes down to it if the decision was yours you cannot make it. Governments and healthcare professionals have to provide advice all the time. You are advised not to smoke or drink excessively. This is no different.

AGAIN what is your advice - vaccinate or not. It really is a simple question with a binary answer

 

[rick81721]

The argument is someone who has some immunity from being infected does not make them totally immune. The bottom line of that article is that people who have been infected are not "home free" and the recommendation by many experts and studies say at least a booster is a benefit - even the Israel studies said that.

To be fair, the same statement applies to the vaccinated.

Sponsored