[ExI] lancet publishes information

[Rafal Smigrodzki]

On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 1:21 PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 1:00 AM Rafal Smigrodzki via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Feb 18, 2023 at 12:31 PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat <
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Doesn't change the fact that the vaccine doesn't make you infectious,
>>>
>>
>> ### The mRNA vaccine fails to reduce your all cause mortality. Knowing
>> this, would you still opt to take it? If it can't save your life, what for?
>>
>
> It isn't about reducing all causes, just one cause - and it does reduce
> mortality from COVID.
>
> Seatbelts don't reduce all causes, just fatalities from car crashes.  I
> still wear seat belts.
>

### Seat belts reduce all cause mortality, specifically by reducing MVA
mortality while *not* increasing other types of mortality, for a net
reduction in all cause mortality. The mRNA vaccine increases cardiovascular
mortality. Let me repeat- the mRNA vaccine increases cardiovascular
mortality. It does reduce Covid mortality (or it did, unknown if the effect
persists with subsequent infections) but because the increased
cardiovascular mortality offsets the benefit to Covid mortality there is no
statistically significant net effect on all cause mortality.

Obviously, the rational decision maker who aims to survive cares only about
all cause mortality, not about cause-specific mortality, all other
considerations being equal. It does not matter if you avoid Scylla if
Charybdis gets you. It only matters if you can avoid both.

Now that I explained the salient difference between seatbelts and the
Pfizer vaccine, let me repeat the question - Knowing that the Pfizer
vaccine will not have a net beneficial effect on your survival and health,
would you still take it?

----------------------------------------


>
>
>> and cuts down on your tendency to spread the virus if you get infected.
>>>
>>
>> ### No change in viral spread proven after vaccination. And why would you
>> want to reduce the spread anyway? You can't eliminate the virus.
>>
>
> That's what  they said about polio.  And measles.  And too many others to
> quickly list.
>

### Polio, measles and too many other vaccines to quickly list actually
save lives, which is why they are useful even if they don't
eliminate viruses. Covid vaccine does not save lives and does not eliminate
the virus. This is a salient difference.

-----------------------------------

>
>
>> Also doesn't change the fact that never getting infected in the first
>>> place gives you better odds of a long, healthy life than attempting to
>>> survive an infection - especially, than deliberately getting infected.
>>>
>>
>> ### Never getting infected, as can be achieved through a lifelong
>> lockdown in complete isolation from the rest of humanity
>>
>
> Or as can be achieved by other methods.
>

### No it can't. What other methods? List them specifically, with
references to their efficacy in completely preventing Covid infection in an
endemic area over long time periods.
------------------------


>   Again see polio, measles, and other examples history offers
>

> I reject your fearmongering and choose to live in reality.
>

### You are intentionally insulting, which is nothing, but more importantly
you fail to provide specific references to substantiate your claims about
the usefulness of Covid vaccines. Handwaving about other vaccines that work
is not an argument - I know that properly developed and administered
vaccines work and I know that the Pfizer vaccine does not.

Hit the primary literature and argue like you know something, not like you
feel something.

Rafal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20230221/437bc518/attachment-0001.htm>