LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


Closed Thread
  Search this Thread
Old 08-05-2021, 11:14 PM   #46
m.a.l.'s pa
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2007
Location: albuquerque
Distribution: Debian, Arch, Kubuntu
Posts: 366

Rep: Reputation: 137Reputation: 137

I'm wondering it this thread has actually helped anyone, or changed anyone's mind about anything.
 
Old 08-06-2021, 02:37 AM   #47
jmgibson1981
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2015
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 699

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
I stand corrected about the droplets then. I need to keep up with current things better.

Helped anyone? I don't know. But I will say it's the most civil conversation I've seen about this in my internet travels lately. That alone restores a bit of faith in humanity for me.
 
Old 08-06-2021, 04:06 AM   #48
valeoak
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2020
Location: United Kingdom
Distribution: Debian Sid, Pop!_OS
Posts: 31

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ser Olmy View Post
That may not actually be the case.

The latest policy recommendations from the CDC are inspired by studies suggesting that asymptomatic vaccinated individuals can be a significant source of infection. Here's a NYT article on the issue, which unfortunately contains a lot of half-truths and inaccuracies (calling asymptomatic, vaccinated individuals "fully immunized people", which they clearly are not), but the bottom line is that there is in fact evidence indicating significant asymptomatic spread by the vaccinated.
A very recent study in England led by Imperial College London that had 98,000 volunteers found that full vaccination reduces transmission of the Delta variant (the most transmissive common variant of Covid-19 identified) by ~50%. Unsurprisingly given that finding, it also found that on average vaccinated people who had Covid-19 had a smaller viral load than those who weren't vaccinated. Some caution should be applied here: so far it's only been published as a preprint and has not yet been peer-reviewed. But it's the thirteenth round of an ongoing, large-scale monitoring study in England: Real-time Assessment of Community Transmission (REACT).

Perhaps one could quibble about the use of the word "fully", but the NYT isn't wrong to call assymptomatic, vaccinated individuals immunised. Immunity is the ability for someone to resist and overcome microorganisms that are harmful. It isn't about not spreading an infection (although, generally, one would expect immune people to be on average less infectious and concepts like herd immunity rely upon that). If someone becomes infected but successfully fights off the pathogen and never even develops symptoms of the disease it can cause then they are by any reasonable use of the word immune.
 
Old 08-06-2021, 07:18 AM   #49
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 9,291
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318
An excellent article published today ...
 
Old 08-06-2021, 08:04 AM   #50
yancek
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Apr 2008
Distribution: PCLinux, Slackware
Posts: 9,485

Rep: Reputation: 2111Reputation: 2111Reputation: 2111Reputation: 2111Reputation: 2111Reputation: 2111Reputation: 2111Reputation: 2111Reputation: 2111Reputation: 2111Reputation: 2111
If you haven't been able to find an opinion from the far right on the subject, read the link in post 49. Some information on the site at the links below discussing their stated position on the issue an other issues.

https://www.adfontesmedia.com/americ...d-reliability/

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/american-greatness/
 
Old 08-06-2021, 11:13 AM   #51
wpeckham
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2010
Location: Continental USA
Distribution: Debian, Ubuntu, RedHat, DSL, Puppy, CentOS, Knoppix, Mint-DE, Sparky, VSIDo, tinycore, Q4OS,Manjaro
Posts: 3,955

Rep: Reputation: 1824Reputation: 1824Reputation: 1824Reputation: 1824Reputation: 1824Reputation: 1824Reputation: 1824Reputation: 1824Reputation: 1824Reputation: 1824Reputation: 1824
#49 is an opinion piece, not a scientific or medical report and with no scientific validity.

The majority of the articles I see online have no scientific validity, and most of those that DO read as somewhat technical. (Which makes sense, because the best information comes form very technical people <researchers>) I maintain that opinion pieces (right, left, or moderate) are far less meaningful than factual data reports and scientific studies from reputable sources such as the WHO and CDC. Comparing reports on the same subjects from those two sites against each other can be very educational.
 
Old 08-06-2021, 11:23 AM   #52
Ser Olmy
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2012
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 3,081

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by yancek View Post
If you haven't been able to find an opinion from the far right on the subject,
I don't think it benefits the discourse to focus on which political labels one could affix to people or opinions. Surely, the important point is whether or not something is factually correct, not whether the person presenting said facts or opinions has this or that political leaning?

And if you'll allow me a small rant: You have undoubtedly noticed that until very recently, no-one ever spoke of the need for having official "fact checkers." That's because (1) journalists are supposed to check facts before publishing an article, and (2) we, the readers, are supposed to do our own fact checking when we want to form an informed opinion on a subject.

I never heard of "mediabiasfactcheck.com" until just now, but after reading just a few paragraphs I found enough dubious "facts" that I will discard their opinion entirely.

I now see old, formally reputable news organisations like Reuters engaging in clearly politically motivated "fact checking" with conclusions that are in no way supported by even the facts they themselves present, which is disheartening to say the least.

Last edited by Ser Olmy; 08-06-2021 at 11:56 AM. Reason: got the site name wrong
 
Old 08-06-2021, 11:38 AM   #53
DavidMcCann
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: London
Distribution: PCLinuxOS, Debian
Posts: 5,830

Rep: Reputation: 2156Reputation: 2156Reputation: 2156Reputation: 2156Reputation: 2156Reputation: 2156Reputation: 2156Reputation: 2156Reputation: 2156Reputation: 2156Reputation: 2156
So, who should I trust? A study by Imperial College, which is ranked 4th in the world for medicine, or a journalist writing on a website called American Greatness? Decisions, decisions!
 
Old 08-06-2021, 11:40 AM   #54
Ser Olmy
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2012
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 3,081

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by valeoak View Post
A very recent study in England led by Imperial College London that had 98,000 volunteers found that full vaccination reduces transmission of the Delta variant (the most transmissive common variant of Covid-19 identified) by ~50%. Unsurprisingly given that finding, it also found that on average vaccinated people who had Covid-19 had a smaller viral load than those who weren't vaccinated.
That makes sense. I did find the notion somewhat odd that a therapy should be extremely effective in preventing symptoms and serious illness while simultaneously not reducing actual viral load in the patient.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valeoak View Post
Some caution should be applied here: so far it's only been published as a preprint and has not yet been peer-reviewed. But it's the thirteenth round of an ongoing, large-scale monitoring study in England: Real-time Assessment of Community Transmission (REACT).
The same goes for the Pfizer study I posted a link to in another post. It looks good and one can draw some interesting conclusions from the data, but it is a preprint, and it is certainly possible that weaknesses could be uncovered in the peer review process.
 
Old 08-06-2021, 11:43 AM   #55
Ser Olmy
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2012
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 3,081

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidMcCann View Post
So, who should I trust? A study by Imperial College, which is ranked 4th in the world for medicine, or a journalist writing on a website called American Greatness? Decisions, decisions!
Whoever has the facts on their side in any particular matter, that's who.
 
Old 08-06-2021, 11:51 AM   #56
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 9,291
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318Reputation: 3318
Federal law says many things – especially about anything that is being used on "emergency use authorization." You must be informed that the drug is not approved. You must be informed of all potential medical side effects – hence the "mumbling" in TV ads – so that you can give informed consent. Also, it is illegal to coerce you to take any medication or to undergo any medical treatment. Drugs with even a slight number of recorded deaths must receive a "black box warning" on the label.

The WHO, the CDC, and the NIH all have substantial financial stakes in these potions, and receive patent royalties from their sales, which now amount to hundreds of billions of dollars. However, it does not take very long to locate peer-reviewed scientific papers from other reputable sources which do not have a financial interest in the outcome. Some of these are turning out to be extremely alarming. I won't cite them here – do your research and inform yourself. That's what the Internet is for ... and your local college librarians can also assist you.

The most serious problem that I have is the continued use of the word, "vaccine." These are not vaccines. They represent a mode of therapy that has never been approved for use on humans.

A "vaccine" introduces dead or attenuated particles so that your body becomes sensitized to them and can thereafter produce a rapid response which we call, "immunity." After the particles trigger this reaction, they are eaten. But these potions don't work like that. Instead, they invade the cells of your body – like a virus does – and causes them to produce a pathogen. The body then attacks and destroys ... its own cells ... in what is known as an "autoimmune disease." These cells can be anywhere in your body – including your brain. Very common are the epithelial cells which line your arteries and veins. The cells of your blood can also be attacked. It is now very clear that the injections do not confine themselves to the injection site, but travel very-uniformly across the entire body including the brain. It is clear now that "the response does not play favorites." In different people, different parts of the body suffered attack. And, in some people – at least so far but it's really too early to tell – no adverse reaction seems to have occurred. We just don't know why.

We only know this: "We've never tried to do anything like this, ever before."

Reports of deaths that appear to be "autoimmune related" now number over 10,000 worldwide, and hundreds of thousands of people now wish that they were dead. These reports simply cannot be ignored ... no matter how much money might continue to be made. The immunization (sic ...) programs should have been immediately stopped as soon as these negative reports began to surface, until an aggressive and skeptical investigation had been completed. But, over $100 billion dollars later, they still have not.

You're entitled by law to make "informed consent," but I caution you that you must now inform yourself. Given the unprecedented method of operation of these potions, your intensely personal decision as to what to do with your own body might never have been more vital than right now. Caveat Patient. And remember that your body does not belong to the government, nor to your employer, nor to anyone here on LQ, nor to anyone else on this planet but you.

Last edited by sundialsvcs; 08-06-2021 at 12:13 PM.
 
Old 08-06-2021, 12:26 PM   #57
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware = Main OpSys
Posts: 3,839

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656
Quote:
Originally Posted by m.a.l.'s pa View Post
I'm wondering it this thread has actually helped anyone, or changed anyone's mind about anything.
While the old adage is still true "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink", it does behoove us I think to make the water a known quantity as welkl as the consequences of deciding to drink or not to drink. At least this thread has seen links provided for more than one POV. That most likely will not change everyone one way or the other but there is at least a chance that some need those links to decide for themselves "which bucket actually holds the most and clearest water".
.
 
Old 08-06-2021, 12:30 PM   #58
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware = Main OpSys
Posts: 3,839

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656
Quote:
Originally Posted by sundialsvcs View Post
For starters... https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/american-greatness/

and for those who don't click links
Quote:
Originally Posted by mediabiasfactcheck.com/american-greatness
Edit: Ooops duped! Sorry vancek

Overall, we rate American Greatness Right biased based on story selection that favors the right and Mixed for factual reporting due to the use of poor sources and the promotion of misinformation.
Yeah, carpenters fixing rockets.

Last edited by enorbet; 08-06-2021 at 12:56 PM.
 
Old 08-06-2021, 01:23 PM   #59
enorbet
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Virginia
Distribution: Slackware = Main OpSys
Posts: 3,839

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656Reputation: 3656
Regarding the definition of "Vaccine" -
Quote:
Originally Posted by https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/conversations/understanding-vacc-work.html

Vaccines prevent diseases that can be dangerous, or even deadly. Vaccines greatly reduce the risk of infection by working with the body’s natural defenses to safely develop immunity to disease. This fact sheet explains how the body fights infection and how vaccines work to protect people by producing immunity.
There are 5 main types so far (this is from the above site but pared down to basics)

1)Live, attenuated vaccines fight viruses and bacteria. These vaccines contain a version of the living virus or bacteria that has been weakened so that it does not cause serious disease in people with healthy immune systems. (eg: Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Chicken Pox)

2) Inactivated vaccines also fight viruses and bacteria. These vaccines are made by inactivating, or killing, the germ during the process of making the vaccine. (eg: Polio)


3) Toxoid vaccines prevent diseases caused by bacteria that produce toxins (poisons) in the body. In the process of making these vaccines, the toxins are weakened so they cannot cause illness. (eg: Diptheria, Tetanus)

4) Subunit vaccines include only parts of the virus or bacteria, or subunits, instead of the entire germ. (eg: Whooping Cough)

5) Conjugate vaccines fight a different type of bacteria. (eg: HiB)

It is possible to see mRNA vaccines as technically different because they contain even less markers of the target than earlier vaccines did, especially the Live variety. However mRNA basically like all vaccines simply targets the actual agent of viral or bacterial infection and our immune systems do all the hard work.

mRNA vaccines contain ZERO PATHOGENS. They simply "mark the bullseye". They aren't "bows and arrows" and most certainly not poisons. If you wish to see a list of 100% of the ingredients in Moderna (essentially applies to Pfizer and other mRNA types as well) click this link ...

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-1...tml#Appendix-C

Members here may have noticed I have yet to report sundialsvcs. I hesitate because I abhor censorship and frankly it seems to me he has become so easy to disprove and discredit as well as be a shining example of where anti-vaxxers actually stand, he's useful as a demonstration of who he and those like him trust and distrust. I think he is his own worst nemesis.

Last edited by enorbet; 08-06-2021 at 01:24 PM.
 
Old 08-06-2021, 01:42 PM   #60
valeoak
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2020
Location: United Kingdom
Distribution: Debian Sid, Pop!_OS
Posts: 31

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet View Post
Regarding the definition of "Vaccine" -


There are 5 main types so far (this is from the above site but pared down to basics)

1)Live, attenuated vaccines fight viruses and bacteria. These vaccines contain a version of the living virus or bacteria that has been weakened so that it does not cause serious disease in people with healthy immune systems. (eg: Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Chicken Pox)

2) Inactivated vaccines also fight viruses and bacteria. These vaccines are made by inactivating, or killing, the germ during the process of making the vaccine. (eg: Polio)


3) Toxoid vaccines prevent diseases caused by bacteria that produce toxins (poisons) in the body. In the process of making these vaccines, the toxins are weakened so they cannot cause illness. (eg: Diptheria, Tetanus)

4) Subunit vaccines include only parts of the virus or bacteria, or subunits, instead of the entire germ. (eg: Whooping Cough)

5) Conjugate vaccines fight a different type of bacteria. (eg: HiB)

It is possible to see mRNA vaccines as technically different because they contain even less markers of the target than earlier vaccines did, especially the Live variety. However mRNA basically like all vaccines simply targets the actual agent of viral or bacterial infection and our immune systems do all the hard work.

mRNA vaccines contain ZERO PATHOGENS. They simply "mark the bullseye". They aren't "bows and arrows" and most certainly not poisons. If you wish to see a list of 100% of the ingredients in Moderna (essentially applies to Pfizer and other mRNA types as well) click this link ...

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-1...tml#Appendix-C
Perhaps some have forgotten that the very first vaccine - developed by Edward Jenner against smallpox - was cowpox. He originally collected pus from a milkmaid infected with cowpox and used it on a young boy. Medical ethics have developed since then.
 
  


Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Singapore reveals open-source blockchain COVID-test result tracker, eyes uses as vaccine passport app LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 03-01-2021 10:13 AM
NBC News - Moderna vaccine insists its vaccine is 94.5% effective... puppymagic General 7 01-04-2021 05:03 PM
LXer: Mozilla Supports the Open COVID Pledge: Making Intellectual Property Freely Available for the Fight Against COVID-19 LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 04-10-2020 07:21 AM
LXer: SARS vaccine development LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 07-05-2006 08:03 AM
Newsforge: Horton AV announces avian flu vaccine for Linux akudewan General 2 10-17-2005 12:43 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:07 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration