The Coronavirus, not the beer

thethe said:
B-Cell immunity is the weaker version. T-Cell immunity is what allows the body to hold natural immunity for years.
Click to expand...

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.12.21260227v1

"Thus, BNT162b2 vaccination elicits potent spike-specific T cell responses in naive individuals and also triggers the recall T cell response in previously infected individuals, further boosting spike-specific responses but altering their differentiation state. Overall, our study demonstrates the potential of mRNA vaccines to induce, maintain, and shape T cell memory through vaccination and revaccination."
 
striker42 said:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.12.21260227v1

"Thus, BNT162b2 vaccination elicits potent spike-specific T cell responses in naive individuals and also triggers the recall T cell response in previously infected individuals, further boosting spike-specific responses but altering their differentiation state. Overall, our study demonstrates the potential of mRNA vaccines to induce, maintain, and shape T cell memory through vaccination and revaccination."
Click to expand...

This was in the early studies before they discovered the reduced efficacy. The T-cells are not maintaining their 'knowledge' through vaccination.
 
thethe said:
This was in the early studies before they discovered the reduced efficacy. The T-cells are not maintaining their 'knowledge' through vaccination.
Click to expand...

There's not much definitive yet as we're just now reaching 6 months since a lot of people were vaccinated but what you're saying doesn't appear to be the case. If T-Cells were "forgetting" then you'd see more severe infections among vaccinated and that doesn't appear to be the case. The breakthrough infections seem to be pretty mild.

This makes sense considering what we know about how rapidly delta replicates. People who are newly vaccinated have the strongest immune response and so are at a level that can prevent infection. As time goes on the immune response settles down but your body still remembers the spike protein. Then, when you pick up Delta, it's a race between your immune system and Delta. Since Delta replicates so fast you have breakthrough infections. However, the vaccine has still given you systemic protection meaning your major systems are protected preventing severe illness. Once the immune system catches up it kills the mild infection.
 
thethe is such a factory for misinformation he's not worth arguing with.

On one hand he wants the evidence that vaccines work and wants things to wait and theory crafts things out (like forgetting T-Cells) but any scientific study that go against him (which are most) are bunk, even if most scientists back it.

It's sad but I'm hardly shocked. thethe has degenerated into a trump meme for years.
 
zitothebrave said:
thethe is such a factory for misinformation he's not worth arguing with.

On one hand he wants the evidence that vaccines work and wants things to wait and theory crafts things out (like forgetting T-Cells) but any scientific study that go against him (which are most) are bunk, even if most scientists back it.

It's sad but I'm hardly shocked. thethe has degenerated into a trump meme for years.
Click to expand...

he wanted to discuss pediatric hospitalizations but then all of a sudden got cold feet...i don't get it
 
zitothebrave said:
thethe is such a factory for misinformation he's not worth arguing with.

On one hand he wants the evidence that vaccines work and wants things to wait and theory crafts things out (like forgetting T-Cells) but any scientific study that go against him (which are most) are bunk, even if most scientists back it.

It's sad but I'm hardly shocked. thethe has degenerated into a trump meme for years.
Click to expand...

Why do you think vaccinated people need boosters?
 
So, update

No one on any of the flights thought they were a patriot for the inconvenience of a mask


Also, a developer I know who called the virus the China virus and a huge maga guy. He is On a ventilator now and not looking good
 
nsacpi said:
I agree up to a point. I think mandates for attendance at a school, serving in the military, commercial air travel, eating out, going to a movie, or an employer mandate are pretty specifically tailored. The choice should be vaccinate and give those things up. I wouldn't make the choice vaccinate or go to jail. Or vaccinate or have your dog shot.

You can have your liberty and freedom of choice. But the price of that you bear for that choice should have a relation to the costs that fall on society from the choices you make.

It is interesting that in the past we've had imprisonment as a punishment for not complying with a vaccine mandate. I could see some conditions (if you combine ebola's lethality with the transmissibility of chicken pox) where that might be justified. But I don't think we are in those conditions and as far as I know no jurisdiction (in this country or elsewhere) is looking at imprisonment as part of enforcement for a vaccine mandate.
Click to expand...


Federal Government needs to apply science across the board and not pick and choose. Now its listen to the doctors and science but all those doctors and science showing marijuana has medicinal purposes **** them. Dont listen to them. Mother****ers literally to this day run a federal medical marijuana program while denying its medicine. I will get the vaccine when I have to to keep working. Wont lie about that, but quite frankly this is the only way I have to protest.
 
thethe said:
[tw]1432781363292164099[/tw]
Click to expand...

thethe i want to thank you for this timely and beautiful graph

if you look at it you will note that cases in North Dakota were running above cases in South Dakota when the governor of North Dakota announced the mask mandate on November 14...and when it lapsed on January 18, the number of cases in North Dakota were below those in South Dakota

I think the cases data can be problematic because access to testing might have differed in the two states...changes in cases may reflect changes in testing access

So I would focus on deaths, where measurement issues are less likely to be a problem.

With deaths there is a lag of a couple weeks before a change in policy can be expected to affect the data. So I would look at deaths in the December and January following the implementation of the mask mandate in North Dakota.

At the end of November 2020, deaths from covid were 954 in North Dakota and 946 in South Dakota. About the same. Over the next two months (December and January) deaths were 468 in North Dakota and 832 in South Dakota.

A natural experiment of sorts that provides some evidence in favor of the efficacy of mask mandates. Of course, we need more than once such experiment before we can draw firm conclusions.

The cases data themselves (which you so kindly shared) are interesting, and also offer support for mask mandates. They show a much bigger drop in cases in North Dakota following the implementation of the governor's mandate. Thank you for providing such an informative graph (whether intentionally or not).
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
thethe i want to thank you for this timely and beautiful graph

if you look at it you will note that cases in North Dakota were running above cases in South Dakota when the governor of North Dakota announced the mask mandate on November 14...and when it lapsed on January 18, the number of cases in North Dakota were below those in South Dakota

I think the cases data can be problematic because access to testing might have differed in the two states...changes in cases may reflect changes in testing access

So I would focus on deaths, where measurement issues are less likely to be a problem.

With deaths there is a lag of a couple weeks before a change in policy can be expected to affect the data. So I would look at deaths in the December and January following the implementation of the mask mandate in North Dakota.

At the end of November 2020, deaths from covid were 954 in North Dakota and 946 in South Dakota. About the same. Over the next two months (December and January) deaths were 468 in North Dakota and 832 in South Dakota.

A natural experiment of sorts that provides some evidence in favor of the efficacy of mask mandates. Of course, we need more than once such experiment before we can draw firm conclusions.

The cases data themselves (which you so kindly shared) are interesting, and also offer support for mask mandates. They show a much bigger drop in cases in North Dakota following the implementation of the governor's mandate. Thank you for providing such an informative graph (whether intentionally or not).
Click to expand...

I posted the graph to mock you.

I don't actually believe that these types of analysis are conclusive.
 
thethe said:
I posted the graph to mock you.

I don't actually believe that these types of analysis are conclusive.
Click to expand...

it is precisely these types of pairwise comparisons that allow us to evaluate the effectiveness of a particular intervention

you choose two jurisdications (whether it be states, countries, counties or school districts) that are similar in all regards except for one...and that gives you an idea of how important that one difference might be

again thanks for the inadvertently informative post on the Dakotas!
 
nsacpi said:
it is precisely these types of pairwise comparisons that allow us to evaluate the effectiveness of a particular intervention

you choose two jurisdications (whether it be states, countries, counties or school districts) that are similar in all regards except for one...and that gives you an idea of how important that one difference might be

again thanks for the inadvertently informative post on the Dakotas!
Click to expand...

They have the exact same curves despite wildly different approaches.

Only a complete moron could look at those two outcomes and say "See!!! the mandates made the difference!"
 
sturg33 said:
They have the exact same curves despite wildly different approaches.

Only a complete moron could look at those two outcomes and say "See!!! the mandates made the difference!"
Click to expand...

i dunno one saw a much larger drop in cases during the period when the mask mandate was in effect

North Dakota deaths in the two months after the mandate were 468 vs 832 in South Dakota. 44% less. That's massive. Yuge even. Before the mandate, deaths were virtually identical in the two Dakotas.

This is precisely the kind of information that a dispassionate observer would try to use to establish the efficacy of a particular intervention.
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
it is precisely these types of pairwise comparisons that allow us to evaluate the effectiveness of a particular intervention

you choose two jurisdications (whether it be states, countries, counties or school districts) that are similar in all regards except for one...and that gives you an idea of how important that one difference might be

again thanks for the inadvertently informative post on the Dakotas!
Click to expand...

You're literally celebrating a minor impact based on an intervention when you have no clue if the intervention had anything to do with it.

There are literally HUNDREDS of factors that impact what you are saying.

What I will do though is take the words of Fauchi when a camera wasn't in front of him telling a colleague cloth masks are worthless. Or Michael Osterholm saying mask are wrothless. Or lab studies which show cloth masks do nothing to stop COVID aerosol particles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top