It's actually 0.7% within households

intredasting

sauce?

Did you get the sources for your claims that I asked for?

Let's start with the easy one, the one where you prove that, as you claimed:

a) Wal-Marts, generally speaking, have better ventilation systems, than other comparable commercial buildings, and that
b) The governments that have issues lockdown orders, have taken this factor into consideration.

This should be a really easy thing to prove.

That study says 16.6%, which is what wincel posted.

Makes sense. I'd expect asymptomatics to be less likely to spread it. Keep in mind the probability an infected individual will transmit (secondary attack rate) is different than the percent of cases attributable to asymptomatic spread. I got the 17% figure from this:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03141-3

These are different things. It does make sense that asymptomatic spread ought to have a much lower probability. However, one must also consider that an asymptomatic person is more likely to have more interactions.

Did you get the sources for your claims that I asked for?

Let's start with the easy one, the one where you prove that, as you claimed:

a) Wal-Marts, generally speaking, have better ventilation systems, than other comparable commercial buildings, and that
b) The governments that have issued lockdown orders, have taken this factor into consideration.

This should be a really easy thing to prove. Or you could admit that you were just making up chit as you went along.

Thats overall, including symptomatic cases

Ah. In that case, I thank you for schooling wincel.

I wonder if he's getting that Wal-Mart study yet. I am really interested to hear how he got to the conclusion that Wal-Marts are allowed to sell non-essential items in locked down areas because the government recognized that they as a rule have better ventilation systems than every other commercial building.

True, but if household SAR is that low, what will it be for passing someone in a shop or sitting at the next table in a restaurant? Very much lower still.

Yeah, but over the course of the days you are asymptomatic over a large number of interactions, it starts to escalate your chance of spreading it to at least one person.

Did you get the sources for your claims that I asked for?

Let's start with the easy one, the one where you prove that, as you claimed:

a) Wal-Marts, generally speaking, have better ventilation systems, than other comparable commercial buildings, and that
b) The governments that have issued lockdown orders, have taken this factor into consideration.

This should be a really easy thing to prove. Or you could admit that you were just making up chit as you went along.

dropping this here because messomi's thread went MIA:Already repped you for a post in this thread, but this may be the truest thing in here.So is this why I misc?

Best figures so far as I am aware at this time:

- between 3% and 4% of confirmed COVID cases are hospitalized/severe, and if you are under 40 you are quite low risk of this



- 1.7% seems to be holding as the percentage of fatalities (17 in 1000) and surely the vast majority of those who are deceased from COVID were severe/hospitalized

- 10% is the present estimate of cases developing into "long COVID", aka long term (though not necessarily permanent) symptoms; and this is a real cause for concern (10 in 100)

We don't know the the long term symptoms will be permanent/resistant to treatment. Some of those who have long term symptoms did not have severe illness.https://health.ucdavis.edu/coronavir...g-haulers.html

It's possible that the mrna vaccines will be effective (any conspiracy aside), but it is also possible that there may be some real life changing long term effects. We don't know and we can't know because the time needed to establish any long term effects has not passed.

If long term effects from COVID are found to be permanent for even half of what is estimated (5%) then you would be choosing between:

unknown chance of being infected (higher for some than others) + 5% chance of lasting health damage + 1.7% (or less) chance of death

vs.

being vaccinated + completely unknown chance of lasting health damage from the vaccine + unknown chance of death from the vaccine (even if this approaches zero)

People should be allowed to make their own choice about this.

The above doesn't even factor in someone's pre-existing health, or association with more vulnerable people. I'm over 40, but I don't spend any significant time with people over 65 or people with significant pre-existing health conditions.

inb4 wincel goes "reeeee" and calls you a "moron".

Source :There is no middle ground for pseudo-intellectual shills like him.

I'm legit confused with the direction of this thread.

Is it anti-vax vs. vax; or is it anti-lockdown vs. pro-lockdown; or anti-mask vs. mask?

It's wincel jerking himself off to his self-perception of being an intellectual person - while he makes statements implying that the government mandated lockdown took into account the fact that commercial buildings that house Wal-Marts have ventilation systems that work better as far as not spreading Covid19 as much as other commercial buildings' ventilation systems do.

Thanks for your bullchit antivaxxer mom analysis from your toilet seat, but no, the vaccine is very likely to NOT cause any lasting health damage or death in anyone. It is obviously much safer than the virus, and someone with an actual PhD who runs her own lab was posted explaining this if you would even bother to watch the video. You should not be allowed to make your own choice on this because you're incompetent, and almost all of you will choose not to take the vaccine, thus defeating the entire point of the vaccine in the first place.

Giving your analysis more dignity than it deserves, you don't just add those probabilities. The spirit of what you are saying is fine though about how you are trying to compare risk of the virus vs risk of the vaccine. What you need to look at is that over the course of your life, you will almost certainly be exposed to covid. You then need to look at your mortality risk from that and risk of negative outcomes/QOL. You may lose your sense of smell, for example. There is also some indication, as you mentioned, that there may be lasting damage form covid. And of course, there is a very low but persistent chance that you may die.

While you may desire a long term study on the vaccine, it isn't practical to wait that long. We have good theoretical reasons to believe it doesn't have any extra notable risk of death or injury to anyone. You, and many others, seem to want to automatically ignore the models we have and all the theory we have about how the vaccine works. (Note that the very reason we got the vaccine so fast was our understanding of this theory.) We really don't need to wait 10 years to see. Sure, it would help us be more sure. But it doesn't really matter right now given the circumstances of the pandemic. Your choice is a virus or taking this vaccine which we have really good reason to believe is safe long term and we have good data to show it is safe short term.

Predictable.

Pointing out the obvious here, but going to do just so no one misses the obvious "us vs them" tone of this written diarrhea of pseudo-intellectual garbage of a post.

How's that study on the ventilation systems of Wal-Marts coming along?

Common myths about the vaccine debunked by Mayo Clinic:

https://www.mayoclinichealthsystem.o...myths-debunked

Super classy how you choose to label me as a "soccer mom" or "anti-vaxxer mom" rather than just give a reasoned refutation or argument.

FWIW I've never had a child that played soccer and I'm not an anti-vaxxer. My daughter has had the full schedule of vaccinations.

I don't get the flu shot because I don't think it is worth it or all that effective. There was actually a study a few years back that showed getting it every year reduced the effectiveness.

The below references drugs that completed the normal length study process w/the FDA:But keep going with the idea that anyone who doesn't agree with you is wrong and stupid.

My body, my choice.

Would like your your source on government approved Corona Virus Ventilated Wal-Marts. You Frauding Lieing Fcuking rat.



Waiting on a mod response on why this looser was unbanned?


$...?

If you're scared, go to church

Did you read the rest where I addressed your concern directly, Karen?

The vaccine is not a medication. We know how it and its products are metabolized in the cell. We know how long this chit will last. It's gone very quickly. The only lasting indication that you were ever even vaccinated would be (hopefully) the development of antibodies to covid. That's literally it. The RNA is destroyed, the lipid nanoparticles are gone, and the fuking protein it coded for is gone very soon after the shot. Chit just doesn't randomly happen. There has to be a biological mechanism by which this would cause cancer, autism, death, or w/e else it is you're scared of. What you're really saying is you have zero faith in our understanding of molecular biology and the models used to make the damn vaccine in the first place. It's ridiculous. The idea that you want to wait 10 fuking years for long term studies before taking an injection when there is a virus going around that is spreading and out of control is absolutely delusional. You deserve to be insulted. Repeatedly.

Again, you guys center the discussion on me rather than on the PhD University Professor I posted, who is far more qualified than anyone ITT to tell you about the risks of the vaccine. SHE said that the risks are VERY low. I'm inclined to take her more seriously than some dumb Karens and Trump supporters.

you seem upset

Here's what the person with the PhD thinks.

https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/lon...JF2LMQTYQ4VSU/Hey...that's what I said! Imagine that. Notice that the few cases where vaccines were botched and caused problems historically were exactly in those cases avoided by mrna vaccines too. DERP.I will because it's true you dumb kunt.

Any updates on how the government deemed ventilation systems of Wal-Marts were less likely to transmit Covid19 than other comparable commercial buildings?

Which univeristy professors' statement did you base that statement off of?

How is a mom and pop small business comparable to Walmart?

And did you ever get back to me on which gardening stores were ordered closed by the CDC?

The fact that a better ventilated space is better for reducing risk of transmission is obvious and well studied. The supply chain argument also makes perfect sense if you think about it for 5 fuking seconds.