Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Recent Covid-19 infections and the unvaccinated

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    Speaking of Herd Immunity...


    Source: https://thefederalist.com/2021/05/27/how-anthony-fauci-made-himself-the-face-of-americas-institutional-decay/


    Fauci lied about herd immunity too, first placing the number at 60 to 70 percent vaccination. Later, he upped the number to “70, 75 percent,” before it went up again to “75, 80, 85 percent.” Fauci admitted in December he was lying about required levels of vaccination to hit herd immunity because he kept reading about Americans hesitant to accept the vaccine.

    “When polls said about half of all Americans would take a vaccine… I thought, ‘I can nudge this up a bit,'” Fauci told the Times.

    © Copyright Original Source

    There is no exact number needed for herd immunity. It's basically "the more, the better".

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
      I'm pointing out that you are arguing with yourself and don't even appear to realize it. Go back and look at who you are addressing in post #52
      You have pointed out nothing of substance nor provided any references to support your case.

      Still waiting.
      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

      go with the flow the river knows . . .

      Frank

      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

        You have pointed out nothing of substance nor provided any references to support your case.

        Still waiting.
        Some folks you just can't help.

        I'm always still in trouble again

        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Stoic View Post

          There is no exact number needed for herd immunity. It's basically "the more, the better".
          The fact remains that Fauci lied and admitted it, just tossing out any number he wanted. But while there is no exact number, there is a range where a disease will not be able to spread depending on it's R0 value (how infectious it is).

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Sparko View Post

            The fact remains that Fauci lied and admitted it, just tossing out any number he wanted. But while there is no exact number, there is a range where a disease will not be able to spread depending on it's R0 value (how infectious it is).
            The problem is, we don't know exactly what the value of R0 is. But we know that it is different in different places, and that it changes over time. It changes with the weather, and it changes with people's behavior, and it's higher in places with a higher population density. And it gets higher with new variants.

            We do know that if "enough" people are immune, then the prevalence of the disease will decrease. But "enough" for this summer won't necessarily be "enough" for the coming winter. And "enough" while people are still practicing social distancing won't necessarily be "enough" when they go back to their previous behavior.

            As someone without immunity, your risk decreases whenever someone gets vaccinated. Fauci wants as many people as possible to be vaccinated. You should be on his side.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
              And some folks are shocked that many of us don't trust him.
              More infectious variants have become more dominant, and herd immunity — 1-1/R0 —has increased. If the Federalist says otherwise, in disagreement with Fauci and basic arithmetic, they are lying to you. Dude, seriously, don’t get your medical information from propaganda sites.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                The problem is, we don't know exactly what the value of R0 is. But we know that it is different in different places, and that it changes over time. It changes with the weather, and it changes with people's behavior, and it's higher in places with a higher population density. And it gets higher with new variants.

                We do know that if "enough" people are immune, then the prevalence of the disease will decrease. But "enough" for this summer won't necessarily be "enough" for the coming winter. And "enough" while people are still practicing social distancing won't necessarily be "enough" when they go back to their previous behavior.

                As someone without immunity, your risk decreases whenever someone gets vaccinated. Fauci wants as many people as possible to be vaccinated. You should be on his side.
                I do want as many people vaccinated as possible. I don't think Fauci lying to "bump up the numbers" is a good way to accomplish that. People are already suspicious of him. Him lying does nothing to help earn anyone's trust.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Sparko View Post

                  I do want as many people vaccinated as possible. I don't think Fauci lying to "bump up the numbers" is a good way to accomplish that. People are already suspicious of him. Him lying does nothing to help earn anyone's trust.
                  Pro-Sicily.

                  I'm going to get my first later this month, as openings suddenly became available (pretty much got a choice time). I've heard that Georgia is refusing new vaccine shipments because enrollment has dropped precipitously. I think there are several reasons for this, and Fauci looking rather duplicitous is among them.

                  I'm always still in trouble again

                  "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                  "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                  "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Sparko View Post

                    I do want as many people vaccinated as possible. I don't think Fauci lying to "bump up the numbers" is a good way to accomplish that. People are already suspicious of him. Him lying does nothing to help earn anyone's trust.
                    IMO, someone in Fauci's position has the option of telling people what the latest scientific estimates are, or what he himself believes, and it isn't lying. Especially when we're talking about something that is at best a guess, in any case.

                    Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/24/health/herd-immunity-covid-coronavirus.html



                    In the pandemic’s early days, Dr. Fauci tended to cite the same 60 to 70 percent estimate that most experts did. About a month ago, he began saying “70, 75 percent” in television interviews. And last week, in an interview with CNBC News, he said “75, 80, 85 percent” and “75 to 80-plus percent.”

                    In a telephone interview the next day, Dr. Fauci acknowledged that he had slowly but deliberately been moving the goal posts. He is doing so, he said, partly based on new science, and partly on his gut feeling that the country is finally ready to hear what he really thinks.

                    Hard as it may be to hear, he said, he believes that it may take close to 90 percent immunity to bring the virus to a halt — almost as much as is needed to stop a measles outbreak.

                    Asked about Dr. Fauci’s conclusions, prominent epidemiologists said that he might be proven right. The early range of 60 to 70 percent was almost undoubtedly too low, they said, and the virus is becoming more transmissible, so it will take greater herd immunity to stop it.

                    © Copyright Original Source



                    My own guess is that it may be 50% (or less) in Florida in the summer with the original virus, and 90% in New York City in the winter with the Delta variant. (But you can't stamp out the disease in Florida if people are still getting it in New York City.)

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                      IMO, someone in Fauci's position has the option of telling people what the latest scientific estimates are, or what he himself believes, and it isn't lying. Especially when we're talking about something that is at best a guess, in any case.

                      Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/24/health/herd-immunity-covid-coronavirus.html



                      In the pandemic’s early days, Dr. Fauci tended to cite the same 60 to 70 percent estimate that most experts did. About a month ago, he began saying “70, 75 percent” in television interviews. And last week, in an interview with CNBC News, he said “75, 80, 85 percent” and “75 to 80-plus percent.”

                      In a telephone interview the next day, Dr. Fauci acknowledged that he had slowly but deliberately been moving the goal posts. He is doing so, he said, partly based on new science, and partly on his gut feeling that the country is finally ready to hear what he really thinks.

                      Hard as it may be to hear, he said, he believes that it may take close to 90 percent immunity to bring the virus to a halt — almost as much as is needed to stop a measles outbreak.

                      Asked about Dr. Fauci’s conclusions, prominent epidemiologists said that he might be proven right. The early range of 60 to 70 percent was almost undoubtedly too low, they said, and the virus is becoming more transmissible, so it will take greater herd immunity to stop it.

                      © Copyright Original Source



                      My own guess is that it may be 50% (or less) in Florida in the summer with the original virus, and 90% in New York City in the winter with the Delta variant. (But you can't stamp out the disease in Florida if people are still getting it in New York City.)
                      “When polls said about half of all Americans would take a vaccine… I thought, ‘I can nudge this up a bit,'” Fauci told the Times.

                      So he either lied in order to "nudge it up a bit" or he was lying before and downplaying the number to reach herd immunity. And he did it based on polls, not science.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Sparko View Post

                        “When polls said about half of all Americans would take a vaccine… I thought, ‘I can nudge this up a bit,'” Fauci told the Times.

                        So he either lied in order to "nudge it up a bit" or he was lying before and downplaying the number to reach herd immunity. And he did it based on polls, not science.
                        Or there is no "true" answer, so whatever guess he makes is not a lie.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          A more charitable interpretation would simply be that there were varying estimates and he went with the higher estimates to try to encourage people, not that he was actually lying about it.

                          Whether that charitable interpretation is true or not, I am not sure... but it is a possible interpretation of his remarks.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                            Or there is no "true" answer, so whatever guess he makes is not a lie.
                            Or he was lying. Why do you feel the need to defend Fauci at every turn?

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Sparko View Post

                              Or he was lying. Why do you feel the need to defend Fauci at every turn?
                              Even the staunchest Trump supporters here would agree that he occasionally mixed things up, got it wrong and played fast and lose with the truth (I doubt that there is a politician who doesn't). But Stoic here shows a willingness to die on every hill often defending the indefensible.

                              I'm always still in trouble again

                              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                                Even the staunchest Trump supporters here would agree that he occasionally mixed things up, got it wrong and played fast and lose with the truth (I doubt that there is a politician who doesn't). But Stoic here shows a willingness to die on every hill often defending the indefensible.
                                Much like Psychic Missile.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 10:59 AM
                                10 responses
                                41 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 12-02-2021, 09:14 AM
                                1 response
                                23 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by Roy, 12-02-2021, 06:58 AM
                                15 responses
                                115 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Markus River  
                                Started by rogue06, 12-01-2021, 08:26 AM
                                25 responses
                                110 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by lee_merrill, 11-30-2021, 08:03 PM
                                28 responses
                                123 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post lee_merrill  
                                Working...
                                X