
Article
I was not impressed with that article. Maybe he let hubris get the better of him? It honestly doesn't sound like he prepared enough for the questions he knew he would get during the show.TheCatt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 14, 2021 8:31 am Sanjay Gupta talk to Joe Rogan about some of Thib's arguments.
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/live-upda ... d=80765039Being vaccinated offers better protection than being infected: CDC study
A new study from the CDC finds that people with "natural" immunity through infection were more than five times more likely to become infected with COVID-19 compared to people who were fully vaccinated.
The study reviewed more than 7,000 people across nine states, measuring infections and hospitalization rates three to six months after either vaccination or initial infection. The study -- published in the CDC's weekly journal, the MMWR -- reaffirms prior research indicating that vaccines offer superior protection than natural immunity.
Here's the CDC web page:A new study from the CDC finds that people with "natural" immunity through infection were more than five times more likely to become infected with COVID-19 compared to people who were fully vaccinated.
That's where ABC get's the "more than 5 times."What is added by this report?
Among COVID-19–like illness hospitalizations among adults aged ≥18 years whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90–179 days earlier, the adjusted odds of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 among unvaccinated adults with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were 5.49-fold higher than the odds among fully vaccinated recipients of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine who had no previous documented infection (95% confidence interval = 2.75–10.99).
So, of the ~200k people in the hospital, ~7k met the criteria for the study.a total of 201,269 hospitalizations ...Among these patients, 7,348 (7.8%) had at least one other SARS-CoV-2 test result ≥14 days before hospitalization and met criteria for either of the two exposure categories: 1,020 hospitalizations were among previously infected and unvaccinated persons, and 6,328 were among fully vaccinated and previously uninfected patients (Table 1)
I don't know how they calculated 5.49, but whatever. I am not sure any of this means you can draw wider conclusions about the immunity of the general population.Laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection was identified among 324 (5.1%) of 6,328 fully vaccinated persons and among 89 of 1,020 (8.7%) unvaccinated, previously infected persons
And from this, the CDC concludes:Odds ratios were adjusted for age, geographic region, calendar time (days since January 1, 2021), and local virus circulation (percentage of SARS-CoV-2 positive results from testing within the counties surrounding the facility on the date of the hospitalization) and balanced using inverse weights on characteristics that differed between the two groups (calculated separately for each odds ratio model) using facility characteristics, sociodemographic characteristics, and underlying medical conditions. Cardiovascular disease was also adjusted in the main model and in the model for Pfizer-BioNTech. Any likely immunosuppression was also included in the model for Moderna. Neuromuscular and respiratory conditions were also adjusted in the model for adults aged ≥65 years. Number of days since previous infection or completion of vaccination, instead of calendar time, was adjusted in the model within the stated secondary analysis.
They don't even wave their hands, they just jump right to that. This is SCIENCE.All eligible persons should be vaccinated against COVID-19 as soon as possible, including unvaccinated persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.
AlL MeDIA Is EqUaLly BaD!1!"People's trusted news sources are correlated with their belief in COVID-19 misinformation," the authors said. "At least a third of those who trust information from CNN, MSNBC, network news, NPR, and local television news do not believe any of the eight false statements, while small shares (between 11% and 16%) believe or are unsure about at least four of the eight false statements."
That's a positive sign -- it suggests that traditional sources are helping people separate real news from noise and nonsense.
Only 11% of those who trusted CNN's coverage believed four or more false statements, the smallest percentage out of any outlet reported on.
But sources like CNN and NPR are deeply distrusted by many Republicans. They gravitate toward Fox News and even-further-right channels like One America News instead. And Kaiser found that "nearly 4 in 10 of those who trust Fox News (36%) and One America News (37%), and nearly half (46%) of those who trust Newsmax, saying they believe or are unsure about at least half of the eight false statements."
Considering all the MSM scandals, particularly of late, this is so laughably stupid it can only be bait.
I did. It's one topic. You seriously are throwing out the mountain range of evidence from every other topic on the planet that the MSM is, at best, manipulating their audience just because on one topic [urlhttps://www.opensecrets.org/orgs//totals?id=D000039180&cycle=A]this organization[/url] decided left leaning outlets were better? The same outlets who in early 2020 said Trump was overreacting to the "China virus" and now pretend they and their preferred politicians never said such things?
I don't think things are relative. At least not here. I think there is more than enough verifiable proof that every MSM outlet has intentionally spun stories, manipulated their audience, blatantly lied, etc. So when someone says anything like this:
That implies they're not all equally bad, which is incorrect based on the evidence.
So you have some objective data that one set of media properties are not reporting the facts, and another set mostly are, but they are all evil?
They both cross a line, but one still crosses it more.
I went ahead this morning and got mine due to the family cancers + I'm going to Vegas in 3 weeks.