The one chart to rule them all, again. Are we rolling over, or going to take another leg up? Whichever way it is, pretty clear we aren’t yet seeing a true wave, more like a bump. Thanks to Dave Dixon.
Overview Chart, September 9
About this Blog
The Healthy Skeptic is a website about the health care system, and is written by Kevin Roche, who has many years of experience working in the health industry. Mr. Roche is available to assist health care companies through consulting arrangements through Roche Consulting, LLC and may be reached at khroche@healthy-skeptic.com.
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
Overcast
PocketCasts
Radio Public
Stitcher
Anchor
RSS - Posts
Not directly related to this post, but I have seen data shared by multiple people that for the two-dose vaccines, there is a temporary period of increased susceptibility to infection/hospitalization/death that comes after the first dose.
Because of the sleight of hand of calling these people “not fully vaccinated”, their negative stats are put into the “unvaccinated” column and consequently the “vaccinated” results look better, and the “unvaccinated” results look worse.
Do you agree, disagree, or remain neutral that this temporary period of increased susceptibility exists?
If disagreeing, why, and based on what data?
If remaining neutral on this topic, would you add it to your massive TODO list and try to do some analysis at some point?
I don’t believe there ever was conclusive evidence that right after vax there was an increase in susceptibility to infection. The studies that suggested that failed to take into account a general increase in community spread.
From the beginning there’s been an orchestrated process to account for and mislabel data to drive the narrative of fear and panic. The ‘vaccinated’ vs. ‘unvaccinated’ status is just another layer of the same. There’s no way to make any sense of this since it’s all filtered and twisted to support the path they’ve chosen. The current cast of DC whack jobs will burn this country to the ground before changing their story and admitting failure of policy and actions.
The yeoman’s work of KR, DD, et al is respected, but it’s not anything you can make any decision/statements from regarding this situation. I think the best take away from any of this is the seasonal/cyclical nature of a corona virus, but we knew that 100 years ago !
I suggest that everyone educates themselves on the history (18th century +) of infectious diseases, vaccines, and immunity. There’s no evidence that any vaccine ever worked the way your 5th grade health teacher explained it, let alone this installed, senile, political hack and his cast of sociopaths in top jobs at the NIH, FDA and CDC. Just like the C19 curves, all diseases that have been supposedly tamed by vaccines were already phasing out before the vaccines were introduced. There’s also history of conflicts with health issues and ‘breakthroughs’ after other vaccine campaigns. The historical biology of virology is repeating itself once again.
They should just call the shots ‘Covid Suppressants’ and stop the ‘vaccine’ illusion of some miracle that will end this if everyone will just succumb to the tyranny.
Therefore they failed to account for a factor they should have, thus you view the evidence as inconclusive?
Or therefore they failed to account for a factor that obviously explains the difference?
In any event, and regardless, what possible argument could there be for treating people in the days after their first shot as “unvaccinated” when they have already started the course of medical intervention, and that course may have effects, and those effects should be accurately accounted for?
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/09/at_long_last_there_might_be_a_covid_treatment_leftists_wont_denigrate.html
Interesting possible development. Wonder if it will pass political muster even if it’s a safe and effective option?
https://babylonbee.com/news/pfizer-releases-popular-new-drug-pfivermectin/
Perhaps we’ll even start to hear about the miraculous Pfizermectin and the effectiveness of treatments on this site! (Dare to dream.)
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2021/09/covid-hospitalization-numbers-can-be-misleading/620062/
The PowerLine guys linked this article in the Atlantic of all places. Word is starting to get around that it might be good to figure out how serious the infected who are hospitalized are, if COVID was found only because they were tested at admission, etc.