What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Government Response To The Coronavirus (1 Viewer)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok sure.   I'm sure that's what you meant.  Righttttt...Whatever dude..Whatever

You repeatedly say it, but you DIDNT say it in that post.  You once again made a silly post blaming it all on "skeptics" :rolleyes:  and I called you out.  And I will do it again and again.
Not my fault that the majority of "skeptics" are the Q/MAGA crowd.  Blame whoever you want for that, but it's not me.  You're welcome to continue to call me out for pointing out facts, I guess.

 
No it's not.
Yeah, last I looked less % of minority populations were vaccinated vs. white, but saying it's very, very, very low is very very very misleading.   

Isn't it something like 50% of the white population vs. 40% black or something like that?   Maybe we have different definitions, but I took that to mean single digit % of vaccinated or something like that.  

 
Yeah, last I looked less % of minority populations were vaccinated vs. white, but saying it's very, very, very low is very very very misleading.   

Isn't it something like 50% of the white population vs. 40% black or something like that?   Maybe we have different definitions, but I took that to mean single digit % of vaccinated or something like that.  
We did this last week in one of these threads, maybe this one. I can find it and post it. Again.

I'm sure someone will then bring up "Minorities don't get vaxed!!1!!IONE!!!" next week or thereabouts. Rinse and repeat.

 
I'd just like to understand what you're saying before reading a 28 page link
I linked to the study's white paper itself. And I wrote "Right on Page 1", so no need to peruse 28 pages. The study's methodology doesn't support their conclusions because they don't have a way of vetting ANY of the information about online respondents.
 

 
Can you elaborate?  Are you saying the Carnie Melon data is old/stale/wrong regarding PhD's and your link confirms that?  It may...I'd just like to understand what you're saying before reading a 28 page link.
Pretty sure he's suggesting that voluntary, self-selected, online surveys aren't reliable.  That is, if you stick a survey up online and invite anyone to fill it out, the results get tainted due to the self-selecting nature of who chooses to fill it out and who doesn't.  Kind of like saying the results of viewer phone calls to America's Got Talent aren't a true representation of "America", as we've started by only including those likely to watch the show.

Edit: I don't actually know if America's Got Talent uses viewer phone calls to fully/partially determine a winner, as I've never watched it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I linked to the study's white paper itself. And I wrote "Right on Page 1", so no need to peruse 28 pages. The study's methodology doesn't support their conclusions because they don't have a way of vetting ANY of the information about online respondents.
 
I think I understand what you are saying, but let me confirm because I think you are mixing a few different things.

You're saying the study's methodology doesn't support their conclusions.  I think this is mixing apples and oranges.  You may think the methodology is flawed, which I believe is your main point...but that does not mean the data obtained through the method they used does not support the conclusion.

You're saying online respondents are not "vetted", which can cast doubt on online responses for a variety of reasons, which I understand.  Are you saying that by their very nature online surveys cannot be statistically significant/accurate and that Carnegie Melon decided to conduct a online survey and analyze the results despite the fact results would be unusable?  That would seem like a tremendous waste of energy by the folks at a credible institution.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here we go again with "it's the minorities' fault", when polling shows that there is a much greater vaccination disparity by political party than by race.  Oh, sure, I know, "polls are useless!!1!"


It's actually minorities with Phd's fault.  Interestingly, "the smartest" are least hesitant. 

PhD's Most Hesitant to Get Vaccine


I said it before somewhere - I really don't care why you are choosing not to get the vaccine and I don't care who you are (demographics) - unless you can't medically get it then you go in to same bucket.  I don't care if you don't get it because of religion, distrust of govt/pharma, etc.  Just get the damn vaccine because I guarantee you the virus doesn't give a #### about your demographics or distrust of the media/govt/big pharma.

 
I said it before somewhere - I really don't care why you are choosing not to get the vaccine and I don't care who you are (demographics) - unless you can't medically get it then you go in to same bucket.  I don't care if you don't get it because of religion, distrust of govt/pharma, etc.  Just get the damn vaccine because I guarantee you the virus doesn't give a #### about your demographics or distrust of the media/govt/big pharma.
I agree

 
You're saying online respondents are not "vetted", which can cast doubt on online responses for a variety of reasons, which I understand.  Are you saying that by their very nature online surveys cannot be statistically significant/accurate and that Carnegie Melon decided to conduct a online survey and analyze the results despite the fact results would be unusable?  That would seem like a tremendous waste of energy by the folks at a credible institution.
Yes.

Collecting online survey results is not particularly time-intensive. And the results of an online survey, plus analysis, can still serve to help fulfill someone's publication requirements.

 
Yeah, last I looked less % of minority populations were vaccinated vs. white, but saying it's very, very, very low is very very very misleading.   

Isn't it something like 50% of the white population vs. 40% black or something like that?   Maybe we have different definitions, but I took that to mean single digit % of vaccinated or something like that.  
We did this last week in one of these threads, maybe this one. I can find it and post it. Again.

I'm sure someone will then bring up "Minorities don't get vaxed!!1!!IONE!!!" next week or thereabouts. Rinse and repeat.
Here it is -- it was over in Ministry's ivermectin thread in the FFA. A South Florida FOX-TV affiliate actually threw up an erroneous graphic that showed minorities lagging far behind in getting vaccinated. See the resulting discussion, with copious links and backup, at the link above.

 
FWIW, one of my more hardcore friends (who is a Trumper) who has been anti mask, anti mandate, anti vaccine is FINALLY admitting that there is no doubt a virus and that Delta is transmittable......but is instead now pivoting towards "It's Bidens fault.  Everything was fine when Trump controlled the border....now everyone coming in has it".  

That this woman is admitting there's a transmittable, no joke virus is HUGE.  

 
FWIW, one of my more hardcore friends (who is a Trumper) who has been anti mask, anti mandate, anti vaccine is FINALLY admitting that there is no doubt a virus and that Delta is transmittable......but is instead now pivoting towards "It's Bidens fault.  Everything was fine when Trump controlled the border....now everyone coming in has it".  

That this woman is admitting there's a transmittable, no joke virus is HUGE.  
So the administration should create a PSA saying-

It is imperative that the "real Americans" get vaccinated to defend themselves against the bioterrorist invading through the southern border while the incompetent current administration stands by helpless.

 
FWIW, one of my more hardcore friends (who is a Trumper) who has been anti mask, anti mandate, anti vaccine is FINALLY admitting that there is no doubt a virus and that Delta is transmittable......but is instead now pivoting towards "It's Bidens fault.  Everything was fine when Trump controlled the border....now everyone coming in has it".  

That this woman is admitting there's a transmittable, no joke virus is HUGE.  
Border! Blamtifa! Benghazi!

talking points work with these folks.

 
Just went down a rabbit hole on twitter that because the CDC reported 911 cases of Lambda variant that the number 911 was proof that the headline was actually a code and the virus is a hoax.    

 
Just went down a rabbit hole on twitter that because the CDC reported 911 cases of Lambda variant that the number 911 was proof that the headline was actually a code and the virus is a hoax.    
That's the number of the address of the pizza shop.  It's all one big conspiracy.

 
So the administration should create a PSA saying-


If Trump came out, spent some of his own personal money to buy airtime and said this....we'd see a 15-20% jump in the total vaccinated number within the month. .....particularly if he threw in a

"I need you get vaccinated...so you can vote for me in 2024....so send me money now, so I can think about it". 

 
KarmaPolice said:
Yeah, last I looked less % of minority populations were vaccinated vs. white, but saying it's very, very, very low is very very very misleading.   

Isn't it something like 50% of the white population vs. 40% black or something like that?   Maybe we have different definitions, but I took that to mean single digit % of vaccinated or something like that.  
55 vs 60....its shocking that he got this wrong too. Its a helluva run we are witnessing

 
KarmaPolice said:
Yeah, last I looked less % of minority populations were vaccinated vs. white, but saying it's very, very, very low is very very very misleading.   

Isn't it something like 50% of the white population vs. 40% black or something like that?   Maybe we have different definitions, but I took that to mean single digit % of vaccinated or something like that.  
asians and latinx have higher vaccination rates than whites.  this whole narrative is wrong

 
:lmao:  

I hope this is actually just an attempt at humor. Intentionally funny isnt really ever your bag, but this would be pretty good for once. 
Latinx is a gender-neutral English neologism, sometimes used to refer to people of Latin American cultural or ethnic identity in the United States. The 〈-x〉 suffix replaces the 〈-o/-a〉 ending of Latino and Latina that are typical of grammatical gender in Spanish. Its plural is Latinxs.

:shrug:  

*I looked it up

 
AAABatteries said:
Just get the damn vaccine because I guarantee you the virus doesn't give a #### about your demographics or distrust of the media/govt/big pharma
more and more it appears the virus doesn't give a #### if you're vaccinated or not either

note - I'm facing possible quarantine, again ... a vaccinated guy's wife/kid (all three vaccinated) has covid .... if he tests positive, I'll be in quarantine a few days again because I've been working with him for the last week

these vaccinated people bringing covid around me is getting ridiculous :)   I like the non-covid unvaccinated guys !!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Latinx is a gender-neutral English neologism, sometimes used to refer to people of Latin American cultural or ethnic identity in the United States. The 〈-x〉 suffix replaces the 〈-o/-a〉 ending of Latino and Latina that are typical of grammatical gender in Spanish. Its plural is Latinxs.

:shrug:  

*I looked it up
lol.

It is a term used only by the wokest of the woke as a way to signal they are doing the wokey pokey. Or it is sometimes used humorously to make fun of such people or pretend to be one of said woke group.

I hope its the second. 

 
More and more you keep making #### up


to say the above is to say that vaccinated people aren't getting covid

are you going to seriously stand by that ? 

more and more people everyday are getting covid - and they're vaccinated. That's a fact - the vaccinated, do you they cling to the hope they won't get covid like the scientists promised was 95% or that Biden said was very very low chances?

use the google

here is an example

https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/nearly-10000-breakthrough-covid-cases-reported-in-mass-over-100-have-now-died/2464309/

Nearly 10,000 fully vaccinated Massachusetts residents have now tested positive for COVID-19 and just over 100 of them have died ..........In the last week, 2,232 new breakthrough cases -- infections in people who have been vaccinated -- have been reported.


its very real- vaccinated people getting covid - how many asymptomatic and nobody is testing them for it ?

but the gem of this article is this

Doron noted that some of the vaccinated patients reported as COVID hospitalizations and COVID deaths are actually due to other underlying issues, where COVID is identified on routine admission screening.

"In those cases, the positive test might be old, a false positive, an asymptomatic positive, a mild infection or an infection that is contributing to the illness or death of someone sick with another primary illness but not the sole cause of it," Doron said.


well duh Doron ... how many of the 615,000 attributed to covid were like the above ? You want to discount them now or make notes. .... where were you in the last 18 months saying hey, yeah, that's a covid positive death but they died of cancer etc etc ?

yes, I know unvaccinated still account for the majority of cases - but we're expected to, we aren't vaccinated 

 
Nobody has ever stated this so stop making #### up. Yes, vaccinated people are getting covid. We know that. We also know that virus does in fact give a #### whether you are vaccinated or not. Stop lying 


great !

so now we agree unvaccinated and vaccinated both can get covid virus

FINALLY

knowing that - the same rules applying to non-vax should be applied to vax as well, agreed? The virus doesn't care right ?

 
Doug B said:
We did this last week in one of these threads, maybe this one. I can find it and post it. Again.

I'm sure someone will then bring up "Minorities don't get vaxed!!1!!IONE!!!" next week or thereabouts. Rinse and repeat.
Yeah...I quoted data, someone quoted polls.  Hmmm...Wonder why it didn't agree?

Then we had a mathematician who couldn't understand a chart.

Fun times..yeah let's do THAT again!

 
If you explain why he's wrong one more time, that will be the time when he finally sees the light.


wrong about what ?

I was wrong in originally thinking covid wouldn't affect so many lives. I was stunningly wrong on how people would freak out.

CDC / science / Biden .... and ya'll for believing them ... were all wrong on the effectiveness of these shots - were you not ?

I think I've always said time will tell if (A) these new, non-FDA approved drugs are really that successful and (B) if they spawn any side effects we are currently unaware of

both the above remain true - until then, be healthy, stay healthy, and the % of getting covid bad is in the hundredths of a percent if you're under 50-55 years of age or so

 
CDC / science / Biden .... and ya'll for believing them ... were all wrong on the effectiveness of these shots - were you not ?

until then, be healthy, stay healthy, and the % of getting covid bad is in the hundredths of a percent if you're under 50-55 years of age or so
Nobody was wrong on the effectiveness of the shot.  With Delta more vaccinated people are getting infected than anticipated, but the fact remains that the vaccine is extremely effective at preventing serious side effects and death.

You are way off in your percentages so unless you are going to actually put in the effort to look up the actual statistics, please stop with this nonsense. 

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top