Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Dosent make any difference. The question is still valid. You posted one link you quoted the New England Journal of Medicine. Since you brought it up and posted it I assume you read the studies. Therefore my question about the studies so I dont have to read the entire link and back track the actual papers. Why not just answer my question instead of making an accusations? I don't get it.
Yes it does make a difference because you need to specify which study you are talking about since there were 6 different ones and not one. They might have different answers. Yes they tested both vaccinated and unvaccinated subjects. If you don't believe the data is correct why don't you review the studies one by one and point out why you think they are incorrect or provide some data of your own that shows us the opposite.
Positive molecular tests in asymptomatic individuals were reported in 42 (1.4%) of 3,006 tests performed on vaccinated patients and 1,436 (3.2%) of 45,327 tests performed on unvaccinated patients (RR=0.44 95% CI: 0.33-0.60; p<.0001). Compared to unvaccinated patients, the risk of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection was lower among those >10 days after 1 st dose (RR=0.21; 95% CI: 0.12-0.37; p<.0001) and >0 days after 2 nd dose (RR=0.20; 95% CI: 0.09-0.44; p<.0001) in the adjusted analysis.
Why. Why do we all need to blindly take orders from the CDC (which BTW change with the wind).
Some people are going to do what mother may I says.
It works both ways, I dont see why we want to risk killing/injuring more young people when 96% of the covid death is eliminated by vaccinating the high risk 65+ crowd. - link1, link2
I would set a date whereby the rules change for Covid vaccinations/treatments. Once everyone has had an opportunity to be vaccinated all treatments for Covid illnesses should be between you and your healthcare provider .... no more government picking up the tab.
Not sure why the OP would want to be invited over to see someone who doesn't respect your right to make your own medical decisions.
Of course I don't know the OP's story and I find the whole vaccines cause autism to be BS but I gather a lot of pro vax people are just as unreasonable as the bad anti vaxxers.
I didn't realize there were good and bad anti vaxxers.
My sister (a nurse) has 3 daughters. Two of them got the vaccine. The third one is able to visit her but has to wear a mask at all times in the house. Her house/her rules.
Yes it does make a difference because you need to specify which study you are talking about since there were 6 different ones and not one. They might have different answers. Yes they tested both vaccinated and unvaccinated subjects. If you don't believe the data is correct why don't you review the studies one by one and point out why you think they are incorrect or provide some data of your own that shows us the opposite.
Positive molecular tests in asymptomatic individuals were reported in 42 (1.4%) of 3,006 tests performed on vaccinated patients and 1,436 (3.2%) of 45,327 tests performed on unvaccinated patients (RR=0.44 95% CI: 0.33-0.60; p<.0001). Compared to unvaccinated patients, the risk of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection was lower among those >10 days after 1 st dose (RR=0.21; 95% CI: 0.12-0.37; p<.0001) and >0 days after 2 nd dose (RR=0.20; 95% CI: 0.09-0.44; p<.0001) in the adjusted analysis.
I would set a date whereby the rules change for Covid vaccinations/treatments. Once everyone has had an opportunity to be vaccinated all treatments for Covid illnesses should be between you and your healthcare provider .... no more government picking up the tab.
The Pandemic is global. As long as there are significant threats IMO the federal gov't should continue paying. Probably and optimistically only a few years.
Where did I say I didnt believe the "data"? You quoted numbers, not data. Personally I like to know how the researchers got their data.
The numbers were quoted from the article and the studies I linked. You can view them there for your reading pleasure. Each study should specify where they got their data. For example in the last one it says: Enrollment in this longitudinal study started in July 2020 and included health care personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers who provided written consent.
You know if you actually read the links all your questions would probably be answered.
More new data showing new infections are falling among the elderly. Now we have more and more data showing that many countries third wave or no third wave, B.1.1.7 or no B.1.1.7 (and there’s lots of P1 in Chile, too), the vaccines are reducing infections, reducing hospitalizations and reducing deaths
Covid is not a disease. It is a virus similar to influenza. We have dealt with influenza for a very long time and have not fell prey to any of this nonsense.
The word "Covid" is literally an acronym for "Coronavirus Disease". It is a disease.
The virus that causes the disease is the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
