What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

*** OFFICIAL *** COVID-19 CoronaVirus Thread. Fresh epidemic fears as child pneumonia cases surge in Europe after China outbreak. NOW in USA (12 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
How does this make sense? Kids have the most naive immune systems out there today and covid is basically just the sniffles for them already.

Change the wording, then, to "... because there just won't be enough naïve adult immune systems out there." Implicit in my post was that children could and would run through multiple bouts of COVID more or less safely as COVID settles further into prosaic endemicity.
 
CDC statement

The CDC is the one that is picking up the possible link and reporting it. It is not saying there's a link between those over 65 and strokes following the vaccine but that their epidemiological screens are picking up enough that it warrants looking at closer.
 
CDC statement

The CDC is the one that is picking up the possible link and reporting it. It is not saying there's a link between those over 65 and strokes following the vaccine but that their epidemiological screens are picking up enough that it warrants looking at closer.
Exactly. From the actual statement, which few people will read bc it's beyond the clickbait headline or article:

Furthermore, it is important to note that, to date, no other safety systems have shown a similar signal and multiple subsequent analyses have not validated this signal: (list of analyses)
and​
No change in vaccination practice is recommended.​

But people would rather use the headline as a "gotcha" to try and prove a narrative than actually read and see what the data says.

This process is working exactly as it is intended to work. Data said "ok we need to check on this" and they did and FOUND NOTHING but will continue to monitor the situation. Pretty much exactly what you want to happen.

Maybe more data will prove to show that this is actually happening (doubtful based on the current data). If it does, then so be it. We deal with the consequences and come up with a solution for it. That's EXACTLY how science is supposed to work.

Or maybe it will completely destroy this "argument" and they will move on to something else to try and prove a narrative.

I'm so sick of the "sides!" We are all on the same :censored: side! We all want to live happy, healthy lives, and we "the people" seem to have forgotten that.

/rant
 
Last edited:
Lmao

New subvariant MORE likely to infect vaccinated

We know this already...it's significantly more contagious than the other variants and it's rather clear based on the pissing and moaning in this thread that this strand is more likely to infect the vaccinated than the previous strands. I mean, it IS infecting more vaccinated people than the previous strands are :mellow:
 
Lmao

New subvariant MORE likely to infect vaccinated

We know this already...it's significantly more contagious than the other variants and it's rather clear based on the pissing and moaning in this thread that this strand is more likely to infect the vaccinated than the previous strands. I mean, it IS infecting more vaccinated people than the previous strands are :mellow:
I read it as more likely to infect the vaccinated than the non-vaccinated. Otherwise it's not really a story worth printing.
 
New York City health officials are warning residents that the infectious omicron subvariant XBB.1.5 may be more likely to infect people who have already been vaccinated or infected with COVID-19.
 
Lmao

New subvariant MORE likely to infect vaccinated

Omg that’s so funny. Do you spend all day looking for gotcha headlines?
No, what kind of weird comment is that?
 
Weird NY post headline only mentions vaccinated....hmmmmn

NY Post
Omicron subvariant XBB.1.5 possibly more likely to infect the vaccinated: officials
By Julia Musto, Fox News


the tweet

Omicron subvariant XBB.1.5 now accounts for 73% of all sequenced COVID-19 cases in NYC. XBB.1.5 is the most transmissible form of COVID-19 that we know of to date and may be more likely to infect people who have been vaccinated or already had COVID-19.

Exactly the same !!@!#!$ :lmao:
 
Lmao

New subvariant MORE likely to infect vaccinated

Omg that’s so funny. Do you spend all day looking for gotcha headlines?
No, what kind of weird comment is that?
About as weird as thinking it’s hilarious that a new variant might be more contagious to those who have already had an immune response to other variants.
 
Lmao

New subvariant MORE likely to infect vaccinated

Omg that’s so funny. Do you spend all day looking for gotcha headlines?
No, what kind of weird comment is that?
About as weird as thinking it’s hilarious that a new variant might be more contagious to those who have already had an immune response to other variants.
It's hilarious how wrong 90% of the people in this thread have been.
 
Lmao

New subvariant MORE likely to infect vaccinated

We know this already...it's significantly more contagious than the other variants and it's rather clear based on the pissing and moaning in this thread that this strand is more likely to infect the vaccinated than the previous strands. I mean, it IS infecting more vaccinated people than the previous strands are :mellow:
I read it as more likely to infect the vaccinated than the non-vaccinated. Otherwise it's not really a story worth printing.
NYC Health’s tweet is going to be corrected soon (not necessarily via Twitter). Commish has this right.
 
Lmao

New subvariant MORE likely to infect vaccinated

We know this already...it's significantly more contagious than the other variants and it's rather clear based on the pissing and moaning in this thread that this strand is more likely to infect the vaccinated than the previous strands. I mean, it IS infecting more vaccinated people than the previous strands are :mellow:
I read it as more likely to infect the vaccinated than the non-vaccinated. Otherwise it's not really a story worth printing.
NYC Health’s tweet is going to be corrected soon (not necessarily via Twitter). Commish has this right.
If so big faux pas by NYC Health Dept but it doesn't shock me
 
Weird NY post headline only mentions vaccinated....hmmmmn

NY Post
Omicron subvariant XBB.1.5 possibly more likely to infect the vaccinated: officials
By Julia Musto, Fox News


the tweet

Omicron subvariant XBB.1.5 now accounts for 73% of all sequenced COVID-19 cases in NYC. XBB.1.5 is the most transmissible form of COVID-19 that we know of to date and may be more likely to infect people who have been vaccinated or already had COVID-19.

Exactly the same !!@!#!$ :lmao:
'may be more likely' means they don't know.
 
Weird NY post headline only mentions vaccinated....hmmmmn

NY Post
Omicron subvariant XBB.1.5 possibly more likely to infect the vaccinated: officials
By Julia Musto, Fox News


the tweet

Omicron subvariant XBB.1.5 now accounts for 73% of all sequenced COVID-19 cases in NYC. XBB.1.5 is the most transmissible form of COVID-19 that we know of to date and may be more likely to infect people who have been vaccinated or already had COVID-19.

Exactly the same !!@!#!$ :lmao:
'may be more likely' means they don't know.
It's may be more likely for
(vaccinated OR people that had COVID). Not just vaccinated which the gotcha clickbait was implying. So if you are vaccinated or had COVID you are more likely to catch the new strain.

And shocked no one posted the CDC/FDA follow up that they did not find increase stroke risk for over 65

SHOCKED!@!;@
 
Weird NY post headline only mentions vaccinated....hmmmmn

NY Post
Omicron subvariant XBB.1.5 possibly more likely to infect the vaccinated: officials
By Julia Musto, Fox News


the tweet

Omicron subvariant XBB.1.5 now accounts for 73% of all sequenced COVID-19 cases in NYC. XBB.1.5 is the most transmissible form of COVID-19 that we know of to date and may be more likely to infect people who have been vaccinated or already had COVID-19.

Exactly the same !!@!#!$ :lmao:
'may be more likely' means they don't know.
It's may be more likely for
(vaccinated OR people that had COVID). Not just vaccinated which the gotcha clickbait was implying. So if you are vaccinated or had COVID you are more likely to catch the new strain.

And shocked no one posted the CDC/FDA follow up that they did not find increase stroke risk for over 65

SHOCKED!@!;@
Doesn't 'may be' also mean 'may not be'? It does to me.
 
Weird NY post headline only mentions vaccinated....hmmmmn

NY Post
Omicron subvariant XBB.1.5 possibly more likely to infect the vaccinated: officials
By Julia Musto, Fox News


the tweet

Omicron subvariant XBB.1.5 now accounts for 73% of all sequenced COVID-19 cases in NYC. XBB.1.5 is the most transmissible form of COVID-19 that we know of to date and may be more likely to infect people who have been vaccinated or already had COVID-19.

Exactly the same !!@!#!$ :lmao:
'may be more likely' means they don't know.
It's may be more likely for
(vaccinated OR people that had COVID). Not just vaccinated which the gotcha clickbait was implying. So if you are vaccinated or had COVID you are more likely to catch the new strain.

And shocked no one posted the CDC/FDA follow up that they did not find increase stroke risk for over 65

SHOCKED!@!;@
Doesn't 'may be' also mean 'may not be'? It does to me.
Sure? Not sure what that has to do with the argument it only affects vaccinated people
 
Lmao

New subvariant MORE likely to infect vaccinated

We know this already...it's significantly more contagious than the other variants and it's rather clear based on the pissing and moaning in this thread that this strand is more likely to infect the vaccinated than the previous strands. I mean, it IS infecting more vaccinated people than the previous strands are :mellow:
I read it as more likely to infect the vaccinated than the non-vaccinated. Otherwise it's not really a story worth printing.
I guess if you stop at the headline. The article is pretty clear though IMO. I'll say though that it's really not worth printing either way. It seems reasonable that a variant could evade a vaccine that was designed before said variant even existed. That it does such a good job of keeping it from killing us...still.....is noteworthy.
 
vaccinated or already had it… isn’t that like everybody?
:no:
Doesn’t that just leave unvaccinated people who haven’t got it yet? At this point I have to imagine anyone in this category lives at the North Pole.
I mean, there are way more people that are vaccinated or have had it so the number of people infected are more likely to be in that category. I think also, like you mention those who still havent had it by now, maybe just super careful, lucky or have some natural immunity and therefore are unlikely to get it.
 
Lmao

New subvariant MORE likely to infect vaccinated

We know this already...it's significantly more contagious than the other variants and it's rather clear based on the pissing and moaning in this thread that this strand is more likely to infect the vaccinated than the previous strands. I mean, it IS infecting more vaccinated people than the previous strands are :mellow:
I read it as more likely to infect the vaccinated than the non-vaccinated. Otherwise it's not really a story worth printing.
I guess if you stop at the headline. The article is pretty clear though IMO. I'll say though that it's really not worth printing either way. It seems reasonable that a variant could evade a vaccine that was designed before said variant even existed. That it does such a good job of keeping it from killing us...still.....is noteworthy.
Again the NYC Health Dept gave the exact message.

If the subvariant was more likely to infect than previous variants why not just stop the mwssage there? Seems redundant to add "more likely to infect those vaccinated or previously infected." You can't admit the message by the NYC Health Dept is written poorly? Tons of people on Twitter asking what they mean.
 
Lmao

New subvariant MORE likely to infect vaccinated

We know this already...it's significantly more contagious than the other variants and it's rather clear based on the pissing and moaning in this thread that this strand is more likely to infect the vaccinated than the previous strands. I mean, it IS infecting more vaccinated people than the previous strands are :mellow:
I read it as more likely to infect the vaccinated than the non-vaccinated. Otherwise it's not really a story worth printing.
I guess if you stop at the headline. The article is pretty clear though IMO. I'll say though that it's really not worth printing either way. It seems reasonable that a variant could evade a vaccine that was designed before said variant even existed. That it does such a good job of keeping it from killing us...still.....is noteworthy.
Again the NYC Health Dept gave the exact message.

If the subvariant was more likely to infect than previous variants why not just stop the mwssage there? Seems redundant to add "more likely to infect those vaccinated or previously infected." You can't admit the message by the NYC Health Dept is written poorly? Tons of people on Twitter asking what they mean.
All I read was the article (which is rare in itself given the source). Knowing what I know about the entirety of this fiasco, it seemed clear to me what they were saying. I have no doubt there are a bunch of people on social media asking what they mean. They likely haven't gone beyond social media to get their information. Stands to reason they'd be confused. None of this is to say that I can't see how one would take it the way you and others did. I can. Sources matter.
 
Again the NYC Health Dept gave the exact message.

If the subvariant was more likely to infect than previous variants why not just stop the mwssage there? Seems redundant to add "more likely to infect those vaccinated or previously infected." You can't admit the message by the NYC Health Dept is written poorly? Tons of people on Twitter asking what they mean.
I know this wasn't addressed to me, but it's worth noting that agencies such as "the NYC health department" have pretty much mangled their pandemic response from the beginning, especially when it comes to how they communicate with the public. At this point, it would be newsworthy if these people didn't trip over their own shoelaces. I for one will freely concede that they worded this badly.
 
All I read was the article (which is rare in itself given the source). Knowing what I know about the entirety of this fiasco, it seemed clear to me what they were saying. I have no doubt there are a bunch of people on social media asking what they mean. They likely haven't gone beyond social media to get their information. Stands to reason they'd be confused. None of this is to say that I can't see how one would take it the way you and others did. I can. Sources matter.

I went straight to the NYC Health tweet, and the text of the tweet, laid raw, is completely equivocal. There's no stretching required to read this particular text multiple ways -- it was not crafted with rhetorical precision:

Omicron subvariant XBB.1.5 now accounts for 73% of all sequenced COVID-19 cases in NYC. XBB.1.5 is the most transmissible form of COVID-19 that we know of to date and may be more likely to infect people who have been vaccinated or already had COVID-19.

NYC Health left the "more likely" hanging out there with no "than", likely assuming (somehow) that the general public didn't need to have the "more likely THAN" part explained.

... may be more likely to infect people who have been vaccinated or already had COVID-19 than previous recent variants. (though this is super-clunky and should be recast)

... may be more likely to infect people who have been vaccinated or already had COVID-19 than people who have never been vaccinated.

All that said, the NY Post knew exactly what they were doing with that headline. I'd never believe there was doubt in the editorial room what NYC Health actually meant.
 
In other words, my model of the world contains these two observations:

1) Prior infection with Virus A does not make you more susceptible to infection by Virus A' of the same family. I don't think that's how infectious diseases work. Could be wrong about that one.

2) People in charge of public health departments are at best marginally competent. I know I'm not wrong here.

These two stylized facts tell me that it's more likely that they wrote their press release badly than that this new variant exhibits super-powers unknown to previous viruses.
 
NYC Health’s tweet is going to be corrected soon (not necessarily via Twitter). Commish has this right.

NYC Health's website has posted the corrected info (my highlighting):

The current dominant variant of COVID-19 in NYC is an omicron subvariant called XBB.1.5. This subvariant is the most transmissible form of COVID-19 that we know of to date. It may be more likely to infect people who have been vaccinated or previously had COVID-19 compared to prior variants.

They have not, however, corrected their tweet.
 
Compelling argument that the claim that Covid is creating heart damage beyond that of other historical viruses was and is FAKE NEWS...

 
Compelling argument that the claim that Covid is creating heart damage beyond that of other historical viruses was and is FAKE NEWS...

Check the date on that opinion piece. There is much newer data available re: this subject. Also, I'll keep my personal opinion to myself, but I'd advise to look further into the author of that piece, Vinay. He's... interesting.
 
All I read was the article (which is rare in itself given the source). Knowing what I know about the entirety of this fiasco, it seemed clear to me what they were saying. I have no doubt there are a bunch of people on social media asking what they mean. They likely haven't gone beyond social media to get their information. Stands to reason they'd be confused. None of this is to say that I can't see how one would take it the way you and others did. I can. Sources matter.

I went straight to the NYC Health tweet, and the text of the tweet, laid raw, is completely equivocal. There's no stretching required to read this particular text multiple ways -- it was not crafted with rhetorical precision:

Omicron subvariant XBB.1.5 now accounts for 73% of all sequenced COVID-19 cases in NYC. XBB.1.5 is the most transmissible form of COVID-19 that we know of to date and may be more likely to infect people who have been vaccinated or already had COVID-19.

NYC Health left the "more likely" hanging out there with no "than", likely assuming (somehow) that the general public didn't need to have the "more likely THAN" part explained.

... may be more likely to infect people who have been vaccinated or already had COVID-19 than previous recent variants. (though this is super-clunky and should be recast)
... may be more likely to infect people who have been vaccinated or already had COVID-19 than people who have never been vaccinated.

All that said, the NY Post knew exactly what they were doing with that headline. I'd never believe there was doubt in the editorial room what NYC Health actually meant.
Sounds about right then. "Media" in this country along with "talking heads from our government" have absolutely destroyed the messaging from day one. Looks like the NYC Health and the NY Post are no different. It's rather clear that next time, hopefully they get this, they need to start messaging with the assumption that most people understand the way the body works at like a 5th grade level. Make no assumptions otherwise and make no assumptions that people are going to points of record for their info. They are turning to their neighbors and social media.
 
Lmao

New subvariant MORE likely to infect vaccinated

I don't read that as saying more likely to infect the vaccinated or previously infected THAN those who are unvaxxed or never had it. Just that this variant evades immunity better than prior variants (again).
 
Last edited:
Just looking at a bunch of separate COVID metrics all at once and looking at the overall picture:

- Wastewater numbers have just fallen off a cliff since New Years. They are reported in arrears, so the most recent are January 11, 2023.​
- Enough time has gone by that holiday-season confirmed case counts are close to locked in. The surge of confirmed cases (7-day average) was pretty mild, IMHO -- from ~40,000 on 11/4/2022 to an oddly lengthy plateau of about 66-68,000 throughout most of December. After adjustments, the baseline level for the first week or two of January is going to still be over 60,000. Comparing the confirmed case counts with the wastewater data ... there must be a significant amount of unseen COVID going around. I can see that as both a positive (95 times out of 100, COVID infection doesn't barely register at the individual level) or a negative (it's just all over, and you never know anymore who's spreading it).​
- Hospitalization data has tracked downwards with wastewater, though not as sharply. The number of COVID inpatients dropped about 10% between Jan 2-8, 2023 and Jan 9-15 -- that's a big one-week drop for that metric. ICU admissions also dropped over the same time period, but again, less sharply than hospitalizations (from 5,681 to 5,300 even). These numbers do sometimes get adjusted, so I want to look at them again in a few days.​
- Finally, 7-day average of COVID deaths -- this number is going the wrong way even as it's "not so bad" as during the Omicron peak. From a summer 2022 high of 519 on 8/9/2022 to a fall low of 290 on 11/28/2022, the January 11th, 2023 figure is now at 472. All of last week's COVID death numbers are going to be adjusted above 500, no doubt. The question is when will 7-day averages of deaths plateau, and at what level? Here, COVID deaths tracks with Nov-Dec 2022 wastewater data -- not as sharp a rise, but for sure too much. The apparent drop in hospitalization numbers (to be confirmed later) would help halt the rise in death counts, so I'm hoping the hospitalization adjustments aren't too big.​
 
Compelling argument that the claim that Covid is creating heart damage beyond that of other historical viruses was and is FAKE NEWS...

Check the date on that opinion piece. There is much newer data available re: this subject. Also, I'll keep my personal opinion to myself, but I'd advise to look further into the author of that piece, Vinay. He's... interesting.

 
Compelling argument that the claim that Covid is creating heart damage beyond that of other historical viruses was and is FAKE NEWS...

Check the date on that opinion piece. There is much newer data available re: this subject. Also, I'll keep my personal opinion to myself, but I'd advise to look further into the author of that piece, Vinay. He's... interesting.

Why is that link in a Covid thread?
 
Compelling argument that the claim that Covid is creating heart damage beyond that of other historical viruses was and is FAKE NEWS...

Check the date on that opinion piece. There is much newer data available re: this subject. Also, I'll keep my personal opinion to myself, but I'd advise to look further into the author of that piece, Vinay. He's... interesting.

Why is that link in a Covid thread?
Because haven't you heard? Everyone who dies now died because of the vaccine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top