The Market Ticker
Rss Icon RSS available
Fact: There is no immunity or protection against The Law of Scoreboards.
Did you know: What the media does NOT want you to read is at https://market-ticker.org/nad.
You are not signed on; if you are a visitor please register for a free account!
Comments on I Hate Being Right
User: Not logged on
Top Forum Top Login FAQ Register Clear Cookie
Showing Page 2 of 6  First123456Last
User Info I Hate Being Right in forum [Market-Ticker-Nad]
Disgusted
Posts: 94
Incept: 2021-07-20


Online
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
My theory is that since the protection goes away at pretty close to six months, the negative effects will go away to a large degree too including ADE type possibilities. As long as you aren't among the dumbest of the dumb and continue to get booster after booster, most that already took the vaxx months ago should survive the onslaught. The ones that are forced to get the jab now and in the near future are going to get ****ed on the next wave just like the dumbasses that take a booster soon. If the negative effects don't wear off too, then it's game over.
Tickerguy
Posts: 177012
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Depends on the level of enhancement @Disgusted -- there's no way to know.

But even a 10% mortality increase is hideous. If it doubles the risk, and it might, it'll kill more than a half-million people this winter alone. If it does worse than that, well...... ****.

That being jabbed increases infection risk is truly nasty because the data is worse than it looks. Some percentage of those jabbed were previously infected, and those people are, by the data, still protected, so they must be removed. This means that what looks like (for example) a -10% effectiveness is likely really more like -12%.

One more mutation and all those who are not in the N-protein seroconverted bucket are going to get ****ed. How badly is yet to be determined but that they WILL get ****ed, and will circulate it among themselves and thus screw one another at wildly-elevated rates (while thinking they're "safe"!) is clear.

----------
I don't give a flying **** if you're offended.

Chromehill
Posts: 345
Incept: 2010-03-03

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
@Microbesrus - All of this is unnecessary, the cases on a national basis are already rolling over. Which is most likely why they are doing it. Force the mass vaccination of the people and then claim victory when the cases decline. Of course the media will not state, just like last winter, that the cases were already declining and would have gone away without the Jab.

This gets Xiden a little victory until the nastiness of the winter sets in if TickerGuy is correct.

----------
"Power, like the reproductive muscle, longs to be exercised, often without judgement or right" - Gerry Spence
Disgusted
Posts: 94
Incept: 2021-07-20


Online
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
****. I guess I'll go back to one of my previous posts and say people just better prepare themselves for a real possibility of death on a biblical scale, especially for the family and friends that won't survive. No way to know till it all unfolds.
Davkj1
Posts: 640
Incept: 2008-10-13

Wolf Demokratische Republik
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Perhaps this is the very reason for the recent mandate.

----------
"Evil may set out to corrupt others, but in the process corrupts itself. -John Connolly
Loonster
Posts: 715
Incept: 2012-10-28

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I sure would love to see a 3D graph. The extra dimension would be days since 2nd dose. Right now age is also a proxy for time. The more elderly were eligible for the vaccine earlier.

TPTB have the data, they know.
Gordonh
Posts: 1
Incept: 2021-09-11

Washington state
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Pretty strong conclusion from the published data in the report. However, we live in a time when we're not sure how much the data can be trusted. It seems that data is constantly being manipulated to fit the narrative, in this case that vaccines are safe and effective.

The NHS data shows rates of Covid-19 for "vaccinated with two shots" and "unvaccinated", but how are people with one shot counted?

I have read reports such as https://newsrescue.com/trust-science-cdc.... that the CDC counted people who had one of two shots or had the second shot less than two weeks ago among the unvaccinated, supposedly because the shot was not expected to fully take effect for the two weeks. The NHS doesn't say how they are counting, as far as I could see.

That would mean that vaccine injuries and deaths could be considered Covid-19 cases and deaths and added to the unvaccinated column. This has led to the CDC being accused of hiding vaccine injuries and deaths that occurred close to the vaccination date, presumably to obscure safety problems.

I'm still having a hard time trusting the case counts, either, given the prevalence of false positives from the PCR tests. I have also seen reports that a different cycle threshold was used for the PCR tests for the vaccinated vs. the unvaccinated, but also strong denials of this from fact-checkers.

Hard to trust the data if unvaccinated doesn't really mean unvaccinated, case counts are inflated or skewed. That said, the data issues all seem to be in the direction of making the vaccines appear safer and more effective than they are, so I guess the true situation is even worse.

I'm frustrated because I don't know what's true anymore. I'm worried about a Geert Vanden Bossche scenario where vaccine-resistant strains tear through the population this fall. We the public need good data, but I don't think that's what we have. Instead, data is twisted to serve an agenda, which is to vaccinate, vaccinate, vaccinate. We rely on folks like TickerGuy that we trust because they look into the data more deeply than most.
Robackrman
Posts: 183
Incept: 2021-04-07

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Biden mandates call the bottom: ?
Inline
Tickerguy
Posts: 177012
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
The PCR+ "case counts" were clearly bull**** in October @Gordonh as I documented at the time. Why? Because between that and the "silent" (not counted) infections everyone had the ****ing thing by then yet that was clearly not true as the curve was rising again. That's impossible unless a very large percentage of the positives were false.

As time has gone on I've been able to put a better confidence interval on that simply on the uncorrelated data, such as that from JAMA. It now appears that about half those told they had Covid really did not. The 4:1 ratio at the bottom end of the CDC's claimed infection rate (infected .vs. reported) appears to hold up, however. At the bottom of the range, but not out of range. With that the math works. With what the CDC claims in terms of people who had the virus it does not in the face of the JAMA data.

Clearly about half the people who allegedly had it really didn't and thus are not protected by seroconversion. That's very dangerous to them, especially if they're morbid in some way, as they THINK they're safe and they're not.

----------
I don't give a flying **** if you're offended.
Jstr
Posts: 32
Incept: 2021-05-19

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
@Dnomsed (and whoever else is interested):

There are useful graphics like the one in this ticker (for cases/infections) in the report, p. 18/19, about deaths and emergency treatment; they show what @Tickerguy writes in the post.
Mikeyinfl
Posts: 98
Incept: 2021-08-02

FL
Online
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
@Tickerguy Just had a chat with my son in College about all of this and he tells me that one of his professors was going over the "official" guidance for masks and then went on to say that he himself wasn't worried as not only had he been vaccinated, but his whole family had so as well. He then added that everyone in the family then went on to all have breakthrough infections and recovered.

My question is do the consumer IgG tests that are readily available distinguish between Spike and Nucleocapsid antibodies or is it just a 1|0 on covid antibody immunity? We know from the St. Jude study that they were able to test for both and did so before and shortly after vaccination showing some changes pre and post jab, but not enough sampling intervals to give us a definitive answer on what is really happening for those folks and if jabbing an NI does damage/alter their total N+S immunity.

So the question is, do those consumer antibody tests have the same specificity as the ones used for St. Judes being able to distinguish between S & N antibodies?

If so, it would be great to know that their recovery included a "reset" of their immunity with the ability recognize both and also prevent them from becoming bipedal covid factories.

I'm willing to bet money someone already knows the answer and is not going to tell us, since it likely would derail their efforts to jab all of us.
Shadowmask
Posts: 669
Incept: 2021-05-24

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Excellent. Lay future deaths at those virtual signaling *******s posting booster selfies on social media. **** THEM after treating others like plague rats for over a year and a half.
Jstr
Posts: 32
Incept: 2021-05-19

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
@Tickerguy -- thank you for another great ticker, succinct and to the point. Very helpful!
Dingleberry
Posts: 76
Incept: 2011-11-06

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I've mentioned this before, but I got covid (antibodies to prove it) from a jabbed guy who was about 3-4 months post jab. He also gave it to a few others who were already jabbed like he was. So right away, we all saw the jab was utterly useless. We all got sick at the same severity and recovered about the same time (2 weeks). But none of the jabbed were pissed (I would have been). And no way in hell will I ever take the jab, not only for ethical reasons but my physical health. I did not take care of myself all these years to waste it on those who ate themselves into high risk.

I do not think the masses will be able to grasp the concept of the jabbed being the spreaders and causing mutations. I just cannot fathom them doing so. They got the polio, measles and other REAL vax.....so this is just another. They will continue to "do it for granny". And blame us unjabbed for their increasing rates of sickness. And Biden and his fake news will ensure that message is sent 24/7.

Unfortunately, we are probably on the express lane to AOS/ADE/VIE.........whatever. Unless Pzifer comes up with a jab ($$$) to counter the jab....Darwinism will do its job. Modern medicine exists today mainly to keep the consequences of horrendous life choices at bay for a steep price. Living longer wronger. I know. I made a living doing it.

I expect the masses to blindly follow their health provider's advice. They always have as most patients are not really interested in learning the "why" only the "how" to fix their problem. Hence the societal ignorance regarding the entire covid fiasco.

But the medical "professionals"......now that's another story. They are increasingly losing respect and deservedly so.

When you work in a hospital, you have to prove you had a myriad of vaccines or absent that, blood titers which shows you have antibodies to said disease. The fact they are not allowing titers to prove prior covid infection which confers broader immunity anyways (and hence no need for the increasingly USELESS jab) is the biggest tell to me.....this is not about public health, and of course never was. This was, is and always will be about compliance, control and cash. A marxist-fascist wet dream. Mandated jabs with zero liability to nearly every soul in the nation and much of the world. And this is just the beginning.

Satan must be looking in awe.

Frat
Posts: 6929
Incept: 2009-07-15

NKY
Online
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Karl wrote..
If you get (or have been) vaccinated and are between 40 and 79 you are more-likely to acquire a Covid-19 infection and thus be able to spread it than an unvaccinated individual.


So... is THIS the reason behind the mega-push to JAB JAB JAB? Without the unvaxed, no one can prove what an utter failure the vaccines are in terms of stopping any kind of spread?

----------
We're ****ed. Where's Henry Bowman Kyle Rittenhouse when you need him?
Nemowillobserve
Posts: 73
Incept: 2020-05-17

Middle Earth
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I may be mistaken but it seems like the numbers out of Israel show no reduction in mortality and actually an increase?
Prof_dilligaf
Posts: 6
Incept: 2021-09-02

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
<b>The jabs do appear to continue to confer protection against hospitalization and death</b>

I do love that the ardent vax-holes use this, a completely unfalsifiable statement, as their trump card for "following the science!". If they truly had a infallible means to predict who will suffer severe symptoms and even death (sans pre-existing conditions, of course), why the **** haven't they been using it before now?

And even assuming it's true, there are other explanations, very likely more plausible ones, to explain the situation, e.g., in this virus video whack-a-mole they're trying to play, the virus has advanced several levels and all the easy targets have already been taken out, leaving a lot of tougher targets to deal with.

Of course, given the miasma of bad information, plain wrong info, and the constant on-the-fly redefinition of words, it's difficult to get a grip on the real situation in the US.
Rporth
Posts: 51
Incept: 2016-09-28

North Dakota
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I think TickerGuy predicted this a long time ago in one of his tickers... kudos. good stuff...

One thing that is troubling me - since Australia is in the middle of their winter - do we know if their cold and flu season is running rampant with folks getting sick and dying? Or would it be too early from getting the shots... I haven't had time to look up numbers - just curious.
Franco
Posts: 178
Incept: 2009-10-06

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
The data shows that vaccinated people get infected somewhat more frequently than unvaccinated, but what about the behavior difference, did they account for that somehow? I mean, vaccinated people will more likely feel invincible and go out into the world and be more exposed. An unvaccinated person will probably act more cautiously, no? Maybe the actual probability of infection is similar but the behavior change accounts for the higher infection rates in vaccinated people.
Jdough
Posts: 173
Incept: 2012-05-04

Texifornia
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
@Patentleathershoes
I can't speak to the OSHA rule but the edict for federal employees is real. The communique I saw said 75 days. What was interesting was it had no mention whatsoever of contractors in it, I found that a little surprising.

----------
We didn't love freedom enough. And even more we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.
Mikeyinfl
Posts: 98
Incept: 2021-08-02

FL
Online
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Dingleberry wrote..
Unfortunately, we are probably on the express lane to AOS/ADE/VIE.........whatever. Unless Pzifer comes up with a jab ($$$) to counter the jab....Darwinism will do its job. Modern medicine exists today mainly to keep the consequences of horrendous life choices at bay for a steep price. Living longer wronger. I know. I made a living doing it.

I think the perpetual antidote is part of their plan. What's up with the new Pfizermectin they seem to be testing?

Not like it's not be thought of before:

Indianarube
Posts: 157
Incept: 2020-03-22

NW Indiana
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
@Prof_dilligaf. Please read this.https://market-ticker.org/postinfo.html
Thank you.
Edwardteach
Posts: 180
Incept: 2021-05-01

Here be dragons
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Quote:
An unvaccinated person will probably act more cautiously, no?


NO.
I haven't changed my behavior one iota. The only changes that have been made have been those imposed by the behaviors of others, and those aren't my choices. Also I know that as healthy or fairly healthy individuals, isolating ourselves as per the diktats of the health ****-wits is counter-productive, as we strengthen and re-enforce our own immune systems by letting it be challenged regularly.

----------
Know what the chain of command is? It's the chain I go get and beat you with until you understand who's in ruttin command here.
Jollyrogers
Posts: 25
Incept: 2012-07-30

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Quote:
That being jabbed increases infection risk is truly nasty because the data is worse than it looks. Some percentage of those jabbed were previously infected, and those people are, by the data, still protected, so they must be removed. This means that what looks like (for example) a -10% effectiveness is likely really more like -12%.


@tickerguy - I read that same series of tweets and the paper behind them. Agree that vax seems to be protecting against hospitalization, with protection increasing with age >50.

Also agree with the quoted text that this is worse than it looks, because if the vaxxed have fewer symptoms, they are less likely to get tested, in addition to your comment about previous infection.
Tickerguy
Posts: 177012
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
The problem @Jollyrogers is that what we're seeing here is that the protection against serious outcomes (HX or dead) is rapidly falling off. It was highly effective, now not so much. Is there still personal value? Yes, to some degree, but as that value decreases given the risk of adverse event harm (remember, VAERS only captures some percentage of the harm, not all of it, and there's a lot of debate on "how much" and it MIGHT be as low as 1%!) the risk:benefit calculation starts to go nasty for more and more people for one simple reason: You only have to get infected and survive ONCE. If you have to keep getting jabbed then you must evade a serious adverse event for EACH jab. Eventually this calculation loses if the protection is not durable without boosters; the only question is WHEN does it lose.

On the evidence (from the UK) it loses for non-morbid people under about age 25 just on the initial two doses. If boosters are required that "loses" point is going to move up the scale quite-rapidly, especially if the risk isn't linear but rather is exponential to some degree and the data strongly suggests that it is.

----------
I don't give a flying **** if you're offended.
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
Showing Page 2 of 6  First123456Last