olofscience
-
Content
2,543 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11 -
Feedback
N/A
Everything posted by olofscience
-
No, we just re-code the mRNA to target the new mutations, and run it through a slightly faster testing process like for the annual flu vaccines. Soon everyone will be vaccinated though, as the antivaxx are selecting themselves out of the gene pool quite rapidly.
-
Why does it need to be 2016? Do you think there's a conspiracy to change the definition? Oxford dictionary snapshot from 2014: https://web.archive.org/web/20141018010428/https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/vaccine Edit: yes I know that's the learner's version, couldn't find the full version and I don't really have a paper one readily on hand. But this link actually explains: https://www.sciencefriday.com/articles/the-origin-of-the-word-vaccine/
-
That's like saying "the definition of a car is a diesel". Some vaccines use live virus, but the definition of vaccine is:
-
With hundreds of thousands of people dead, and thousands dying every day, despite economy-crippling lockdowns, I think it was a good motivator that focused people's minds.
-
This statement does not make any sense. Covid-19 vaccines are vaccines. Meaning, they show a part of the virus to the immune system (via single protein, disabled virus, etc). It's up to the vaccinated person's immune system to then decide WHERE to focus the immune response. And it won't be perfect since we can't completely control our immune systems - for example, mine likes to focus on grass pollen in the summer, much to my dismay and discomfort. But the mRNA vaccines minimise this by presenting nothing else except the spike protein, which is a really impressive technological feat.
-
Then this is an opportunity to learn. This is why mRNA technology is so revolutionary - to change the vaccine "target" all you need is to change the code in the mRNA, like changing computer code (https://abcnews.go.com/Health/mrna-vaccines-changing-coronavirus/story?id=76187538). And this is the first time in history that an mRNA vaccine was developed, and deployed. mRNA technology is even being considered to replace the existing flu vaccine and even cancer treatments. So it's ironic that in such exciting times with medical technology, people are turning to horse paste because of misinformation. So sure, covid-19 could keep mutating. We can just keep updating the mRNA vaccines every year too. But if people don't get vaccinated at all, then they'll end up like the chickens in the article you linked.
-
So it doesn't really address the fact that your National Geographic link rebutted itself, but you've now found another crackpot academic. You can probably find a steady stream of crackpot academics, and try to make me rebut every single one of them, but that's really just running away from the point isn't it? And you're posting it here BEFORE you've read it? That's why your previous point was demolished...you didn't read the link before posting. This is just trolling now.
-
Sure thing. I shall throw myself out of aircraft in the meantime.
-
So...are you going to address my last post, or just ignore it and pretend your point wasn't completely demolished? Also waiting for your rebuttal on my calculations for age group 40-49. We can discuss the statistics of covid and children afterwards.
-
No need, the article you posted already does that for me: And also: Did you even read the article?
-
So...after railing about over-simplistic solutions to a "complex nonlinear system"(?) you're back to pushing horse paste? Yep, not peer reviewed.
-
Show your maths then. I'll show my calculations: Total deaths from covid-19 in the US, age group 40-49: 23,501 (as of September 21) https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-from-covid-by-age-us/ Total infections of covid-19 in the US, age group 40-49: 4,790,271 (as of September 21) https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-from-covid-by-age-us/ 23,501 / 4,790,217 = 0.49% chance of dying, an order of magnitude higher than your numbers (490 in 100k chance of death). This actually seems to be in BASE territory. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/04/fit-and-healthy-man-42-from-southport-who-rejected-vaccine-dies-of-covid EDIT: fixed order of magnitude
-
Are those stats with or without lockdowns? For a proper bayesian analysis you should really calculate P(death | covid-positive & age group). Edit: if you go to r/HermanCainAward it's full of people who kept posting how their chance of dying was << 1%. Needless to say it did not end well for them.
-
You missed all the news about dexamethasone. Or you just ignored it to fit your narrative...
-
Nonlinear systems can be solved with implicit methods, and linear systems are usually solved with iterative methods like Jacobi, Gauss-Siedel or the Conjugate Gradient method and they would be absolutely useless in treating covid, because it's a completely different subject. I solve complex nonlinear systems in my day job. And I can assure you, I am less than useless at treating covid or making vaccines. What I am useful for, is solving complex nonlinear systems, and pointing out that you're probably just saying stuff from my field (that has nothing to do with covid) to impress people with technical jargon. Why does it sound like another poster? hmm...
-
so...what breakthroughs have you made so far?
-
And yet...we have smartphones. (to clarify - they use flash memory/sd cards, which use electron quantum mechanical tunnelling to store data. Among many other technologies.)
-
Hey, don't joke. base698 knows what he's talking about - he can draw the Krebs cycle...from memory.
-
You linked to the open public hearing bit where an unaffiliated doctor presented about VAERS statistics and declared that vaccines cause more deaths than prevent them. She also presented a slide that heavily implied that the vaccines CAUSED the variants to emerge because of evolutionary pressure - an argument I already addressed in a different thread. To debunk the VAERS analysis: https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-vaers-12000-idUSL1N2P21DB edit: another article on why VAERS is becoming a source of misinformation: https://theconversation.com/unverified-reports-of-vaccine-side-effects-in-vaers-arent-the-smoking-guns-portrayed-by-right-wing-media-outlets-they-can-offer-insight-into-vaccine-hesitancy-166401
-
You mean the 600,000 people who died? Yep, shame on the MSM focusing on that tiny thing...
-
Reading confuses him - check. Bad with numbers - check. Insecure and wants validation - triple check
-
Had better things to do. And no, if those statements confuse you, you're beyond help I'm afraid...
-
I think reading confuses him. I read the linked article, and brent's "summary" is way off.
-
What you mentioned are privileges, and it's illegal to deny those privileges based on race, sexuality, and religion. Being antivax is none of those.
-
You've moved the goalposts to market dominance because you really can't argue against the cost numbers right? Let me emphasise, market share is not cost. If you think solar is NOT the cheapest electricity, put up actual proof. Because, let me repeat, market share is NOT cost. They're different terms, spelled differently and mean different things.
