|
[OT] Don't do this!
"Bruce" wrote in message ... On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 11:05:04 -0000, "Ophelia" > wrote: > > >Yes! I got mine over a week ago, and he got his yesterday! Just the first >ones though! I get my second on the last week in April. He hasn't been >told yet. > >You? That's good. It hasn't started here yet, I believe. They start sometime this month, but I won't be high on the list. === Depends on age and health! |
[OT] Don't do this!
On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 17:30:08 -0000, "Ophelia" >
wrote: > > >"Bruce" wrote in message ... > >On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 11:05:04 -0000, "Ophelia" > >wrote: > >> >> >>Yes! I got mine over a week ago, and he got his yesterday! Just the first >>ones though! I get my second on the last week in April. He hasn't been >>told yet. >> >>You? > >That's good. It hasn't started here yet, I believe. They start >sometime this month, but I won't be high on the list. > >=== > >Depends on age and health! Yes. I'm (just) under 60 and have no underlying conditions. Maybe sometime in the second half of the year. -- The real Bruce posts with NewsgroupDirect (see headers). |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2021-02-14 9:28 a.m., Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2021-02-14 11:16 a.m., Graham wrote: >> On 2021-02-14 8:46 a.m., Dave Smith wrote: >>> On 2021-02-14 9:04 a.m., Taxed and Spent wrote: >>>> On 2/14/2021 5:43 AM, S Viemeister wrote: >>>>> On 14/02/2021 13:05, Gary wrote: >>>>>> On 2/14/2021 6:05 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>>>>> Yes! I got mine over a week ago, and he got his yesterday! Just the >>>>>>> first ones though!** I get my second on the last week in April.* He >>>>>>> hasn't been told yet. >>>>>> >>>>>> Huh?* I've heard that you need to get the second one in 2-3 weeks, >>>>>> not >>>>>> months later. >>>>>> >>>>> Different country, different rules. The WHO have agreed that the >>>>> longer >>>>> interval isn't a problem. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> without the "gold standard" studies. >>>> >>> >>> The pros have played fast and loose with the "science" in this >>> pandemic. People kept saying to follow the science, but the stuff >>> they were talking about was more anecdotal than empirical.* Early on >>> they said that masks weren't necessary, Save them for the medical and >>> long term care workers. Then they were a good idea.* Then they >>> started mandating masks indoors.* Science is supposed to be based on >>> facts, so the conclusions should not be changing repeatedly. >> >> FFS!! Things change as you learn more!!! > > > Yes, things change as you learn more. The thing is that it was never > science. Of course it ****ing was! Initially, it was thought to spread mainly through surface contamination, much like seasonal flu. Only after research from multiple sources was it shown to be mainly aerosol spread. |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2021-02-14 10:29 a.m., S Viemeister wrote:
> On 14/02/2021 16:16, Graham wrote: >> On 2021-02-14 8:46 a.m., Dave Smith wrote: > >>> The pros have played fast and loose with the "science" in this >>> pandemic. People kept saying to follow the science, but the stuff >>> they were talking about was more anecdotal than empirical.* Early on >>> they said that masks weren't necessary, Save them for the medical and >>> long term care workers. Then they were a good idea.* Then they >>> started mandating masks indoors.* Science is supposed to be based on >>> facts, so the conclusions should not be changing repeatedly. >> >> FFS!! Things change as you learn more!!! > > Indeed. > Somewhere, I have an essay written by my molecular biologist niece on > that very subject. > Shhhhh! Too many blocked ears and blinkered eyes around here! |
[OT] Don't do this!
On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 11:02:03 -0700, Graham > wrote:
>On 2021-02-14 10:29 a.m., S Viemeister wrote: >> On 14/02/2021 16:16, Graham wrote: >>> On 2021-02-14 8:46 a.m., Dave Smith wrote: >> >>>> The pros have played fast and loose with the "science" in this >>>> pandemic. People kept saying to follow the science, but the stuff >>>> they were talking about was more anecdotal than empirical.* Early on >>>> they said that masks weren't necessary, Save them for the medical and >>>> long term care workers. Then they were a good idea.* Then they >>>> started mandating masks indoors.* Science is supposed to be based on >>>> facts, so the conclusions should not be changing repeatedly. >>> >>> FFS!! Things change as you learn more!!! >> >> Indeed. >> Somewhere, I have an essay written by my molecular biologist niece on >> that very subject. >> >Shhhhh! Too many blocked ears and blinkered eyes around here! You'd think that the ability to learn is a necessity for a scientist, not a sign of weakness. |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2021-02-14 11:05 a.m., Bruce wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 11:02:03 -0700, Graham > wrote: > >> On 2021-02-14 10:29 a.m., S Viemeister wrote: >>> On 14/02/2021 16:16, Graham wrote: >>>> On 2021-02-14 8:46 a.m., Dave Smith wrote: >>> >>>>> The pros have played fast and loose with the "science" in this >>>>> pandemic. People kept saying to follow the science, but the stuff >>>>> they were talking about was more anecdotal than empirical.* Early on >>>>> they said that masks weren't necessary, Save them for the medical and >>>>> long term care workers. Then they were a good idea.* Then they >>>>> started mandating masks indoors.* Science is supposed to be based on >>>>> facts, so the conclusions should not be changing repeatedly. >>>> >>>> FFS!! Things change as you learn more!!! >>> >>> Indeed. >>> Somewhere, I have an essay written by my molecular biologist niece on >>> that very subject. >>> >> Shhhhh! Too many blocked ears and blinkered eyes around here! > > You'd think that the ability to learn is a necessity for a scientist, > not a sign of weakness. > PRECISELY!!! |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2021-02-14 11:23 a.m., Taxed and Spent wrote:
> On 2/14/2021 8:16 AM, Graham wrote: >> On 2021-02-14 8:46 a.m., Dave Smith wrote: >>> On 2021-02-14 9:04 a.m., Taxed and Spent wrote: >>>> On 2/14/2021 5:43 AM, S Viemeister wrote: >>>>> On 14/02/2021 13:05, Gary wrote: >>>>>> On 2/14/2021 6:05 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>>>>> Yes! I got mine over a week ago, and he got his yesterday! Just the >>>>>>> first ones though!** I get my second on the last week in April.* He >>>>>>> hasn't been told yet. >>>>>> >>>>>> Huh?* I've heard that you need to get the second one in 2-3 weeks, >>>>>> not >>>>>> months later. >>>>>> >>>>> Different country, different rules. The WHO have agreed that the >>>>> longer >>>>> interval isn't a problem. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> without the "gold standard" studies. >>>> >>> >>> The pros have played fast and loose with the "science" in this pandemic. >>> People kept saying to follow the science, but the stuff they were >>> talking about was more anecdotal than empirical.* Early on they said >>> that masks weren't necessary, Save them for the medical and long term >>> care workers. Then they were a good idea.* Then they started mandating >>> masks indoors.* Science is supposed to be based on facts, so the >>> conclusions should not be changing repeatedly. >> >> FFS!! Things change as you learn more!!! >> > > > True, but they did not learn anything about masks other than the supply > chain improved. > In other words.... they should have been telling us to follow the supply line rather than trying to insult us by telling us to follow the science. |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2/14/2021 10:00 AM, Graham wrote:
> On 2021-02-14 9:28 a.m., Dave Smith wrote: >> On 2021-02-14 11:16 a.m., Graham wrote: >>> On 2021-02-14 8:46 a.m., Dave Smith wrote: >>>> On 2021-02-14 9:04 a.m., Taxed and Spent wrote: >>>>> On 2/14/2021 5:43 AM, S Viemeister wrote: >>>>>> On 14/02/2021 13:05, Gary wrote: >>>>>>> On 2/14/2021 6:05 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>>>>>> Yes! I got mine over a week ago, and he got his yesterday! Just the >>>>>>>> first ones though!** I get my second on the last week in April.* He >>>>>>>> hasn't been told yet. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Huh?* I've heard that you need to get the second one in 2-3 weeks, >>>>>>> not >>>>>>> months later. >>>>>>> >>>>>> Different country, different rules. The WHO have agreed that the >>>>>> longer >>>>>> interval isn't a problem. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> without the "gold standard" studies. >>>>> >>>> >>>> The pros have played fast and loose with the "science" in this >>>> pandemic. People kept saying to follow the science, but the stuff >>>> they were talking about was more anecdotal than empirical.* Early on >>>> they said that masks weren't necessary, Save them for the medical and >>>> long term care workers. Then they were a good idea.* Then they >>>> started mandating masks indoors.* Science is supposed to be based on >>>> facts, so the conclusions should not be changing repeatedly. >>> >>> FFS!! Things change as you learn more!!! >> >> >> Yes, things change as you learn more. The thing is that it was never >> science. > > Of course it ****ing was! Initially, it was thought to spread mainly > through surface contamination, much like seasonal flu. Only after > research from multiple sources was it shown to be mainly aerosol spread. > that is not true. |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2/14/2021 9:26 AM, Ophelia wrote:
> > > "Taxed and Spent" wrote in message ... > > On 2/14/2021 7:29 AM, Ophelia wrote: >> >> >> "Taxed and Spent" wrote in message ... >> >> On 2/14/2021 6:13 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>> >>> >>> "Gary" wrote in message ... >>> >>> On 2/14/2021 6:05 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>> Yes! I got mine over a week ago, and he got his yesterday! Just the >>>> first ones though! I get my second on the last week in April. He >>>> hasn't been told yet. >>> >>> Huh? I've heard that you need to get the second one in 2-3 weeks, not >>> months later. >>> >>> === >>> >>> That is how it started but it has lengthened now! They say it is >>> better! >>> >>> >> >> >> They say it is better because the logistics are screwed up (after local >> and state agencies knowing for over a year this was coming . . .) and >> this new story fits the logistics. No studies cited. >> >> You know, masks were unnecessary. Before they were, after the supply >> problem eased. >> >> ==== >> >> Not here. We were always told to wear masks. I think it was Mr >> Trump >> that said they weren't necessary >> > > Of course you think that. But you are wrong. It was Dr. Fauci. You > know, the "gold standards" guy. LOL. > > ==== > > I have no intention of arguing about this. Was it, or was it not, Trump > who said masks were not necessary? > > > Fauci said it. If Trump said it, I guess he was taking the advise of our nation's most trusted medical advisor. |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2021-02-14 1:00 p.m., Graham wrote:
> On 2021-02-14 9:28 a.m., Dave Smith wrote: >>> FFS!! Things change as you learn more!!! >> >> >> Yes, things change as you learn more. The thing is that it was never >> science. > > Of course it ****ing was! Initially, it was thought to spread mainly > through surface contamination, much like seasonal flu. Only after > research from multiple sources was it shown to be mainly aerosol spread. Actually, I did a little online research on it at the time. I could not find actual studies. The results I found were stories about what was reported from hospitals and health units in various places. There was never any real data collected and no statistical analysis. |
[OT] Don't do this!
On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 10:34:11 -0800, Taxed and Spent
> wrote: >On 2/14/2021 9:26 AM, Ophelia wrote: >> >> >> "Taxed and Spent" wrote in message ... >> >> On 2/14/2021 7:29 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>> >>> >>> "Taxed and Spent" wrote in message ... >>> >>> On 2/14/2021 6:13 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> "Gary" wrote in message ... >>>> >>>> On 2/14/2021 6:05 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>>> Yes! I got mine over a week ago, and he got his yesterday! Just the >>>>> first ones though! I get my second on the last week in April. He >>>>> hasn't been told yet. >>>> >>>> Huh? I've heard that you need to get the second one in 2-3 weeks, not >>>> months later. >>>> >>>> === >>>> >>>> That is how it started but it has lengthened now! They say it is >>>> better! >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> They say it is better because the logistics are screwed up (after local >>> and state agencies knowing for over a year this was coming . . .) and >>> this new story fits the logistics. No studies cited. >>> >>> You know, masks were unnecessary. Before they were, after the supply >>> problem eased. >>> >>> ==== >>> >>> Not here. We were always told to wear masks. I think it was Mr >>> Trump >>> that said they weren't necessary >>> >> >> Of course you think that. But you are wrong. It was Dr. Fauci. You >> know, the "gold standards" guy. LOL. >> >> ==== >> >> I have no intention of arguing about this. Was it, or was it not, Trump >> who said masks were not necessary? >> >> >> > > >Fauci said it. If Trump said it, I guess he was taking the advise of >our nation's most trusted medical advisor. Trump always tried to downplay covid. He was afraid the pandemic would affect the economy and the economy was his ticket to re-election. He didn't care how many people died in the meantime. Narcissism..., right Bryan? |
[OT] Don't do this!
|
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2/14/2021 12:48 PM, Bruce wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 17:30:08 -0000, "Ophelia" > > wrote: > >> >> >> "Bruce" wrote in message ... >> >> On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 11:05:04 -0000, "Ophelia" > >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Yes! I got mine over a week ago, and he got his yesterday! Just the first >>> ones though! I get my second on the last week in April. He hasn't been >>> told yet. >>> >>> You? >> >> That's good. It hasn't started here yet, I believe. They start >> sometime this month, but I won't be high on the list. >> >> === >> >> Depends on age and health! > > Yes. I'm (just) under 60 and have no underlying conditions. Maybe > sometime in the second half of the year. > Yes, being a walking asshole like you isn't an underlying covid condition. Jill |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2/14/2021 10:38 AM, Bruce wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 10:34:11 -0800, Taxed and Spent > > wrote: > >> On 2/14/2021 9:26 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>> >>> >>> "Taxed and Spent" wrote in message ... >>> >>> On 2/14/2021 7:29 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> "Taxed and Spent" wrote in message ... >>>> >>>> On 2/14/2021 6:13 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Gary" wrote in message ... >>>>> >>>>> On 2/14/2021 6:05 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>>>> Yes! I got mine over a week ago, and he got his yesterday! Just the >>>>>> first ones though! I get my second on the last week in April. He >>>>>> hasn't been told yet. >>>>> >>>>> Huh? I've heard that you need to get the second one in 2-3 weeks, not >>>>> months later. >>>>> >>>>> === >>>>> >>>>> That is how it started but it has lengthened now! They say it is >>>>> better! >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> They say it is better because the logistics are screwed up (after local >>>> and state agencies knowing for over a year this was coming . . .) and >>>> this new story fits the logistics. No studies cited. >>>> >>>> You know, masks were unnecessary. Before they were, after the supply >>>> problem eased. >>>> >>>> ==== >>>> >>>> Not here. We were always told to wear masks. I think it was Mr >>>> Trump >>>> that said they weren't necessary >>>> >>> >>> Of course you think that. But you are wrong. It was Dr. Fauci. You >>> know, the "gold standards" guy. LOL. >>> >>> ==== >>> >>> I have no intention of arguing about this. Was it, or was it not, Trump >>> who said masks were not necessary? >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> Fauci said it. If Trump said it, I guess he was taking the advise of >> our nation's most trusted medical advisor. > > Trump always tried to downplay covid. He was afraid the pandemic would > affect the economy and the economy was his ticket to re-election. He > didn't care how many people died in the meantime. Narcissism..., right > Bryan? > But those who played it up to sometimes hysterical levels with the intent of harming Trump's reelection chances are okey dokey, eh? |
[OT] Don't do this!
On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 11:06:56 -0700, Graham > wrote:
>On 2021-02-14 11:05 a.m., Bruce wrote: >> On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 11:02:03 -0700, Graham > wrote: >> >>> On 2021-02-14 10:29 a.m., S Viemeister wrote: >>>> On 14/02/2021 16:16, Graham wrote: >>>>> On 2021-02-14 8:46 a.m., Dave Smith wrote: >>>> >>>>>> The pros have played fast and loose with the "science" in this >>>>>> pandemic. People kept saying to follow the science, but the stuff >>>>>> they were talking about was more anecdotal than empirical.* Early on >>>>>> they said that masks weren't necessary, Save them for the medical and >>>>>> long term care workers. Then they were a good idea.* Then they >>>>>> started mandating masks indoors.* Science is supposed to be based on >>>>>> facts, so the conclusions should not be changing repeatedly. >>>>> >>>>> FFS!! Things change as you learn more!!! >>>> >>>> Indeed. >>>> Somewhere, I have an essay written by my molecular biologist niece on >>>> that very subject. >>>> >>> Shhhhh! Too many blocked ears and blinkered eyes around here! >> >> You'd think that the ability to learn is a necessity for a scientist, >> not a sign of weakness. >> >PRECISELY!!! are you forgetting who was in charge of WHO? Who fired science personel because too much info was being shared. Indeed, info that didn't go with the rump promo? Who handled supplies? Janet US |
[OT] Don't do this!
On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 07:54:30 -0800, Taxed and Spent
> wrote: >On 2/14/2021 7:29 AM, Ophelia wrote: >> >> >> "Taxed and Spent" wrote in message ... >> >> On 2/14/2021 6:13 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>> >>> >>> "Gary" wrote in message ... >>> >>> On 2/14/2021 6:05 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>> Yes! I got mine over a week ago, and he got his yesterday! Just the >>>> first ones though! I get my second on the last week in April. He >>>> hasn't been told yet. >>> >>> Huh? I've heard that you need to get the second one in 2-3 weeks, not >>> months later. >>> >>> === >>> >>> That is how it started but it has lengthened now! They say it is >>> better! >>> >>> >> >> >> They say it is better because the logistics are screwed up (after local >> and state agencies knowing for over a year this was coming . . .) and >> this new story fits the logistics. No studies cited. >> >> You know, masks were unnecessary. Before they were, after the supply >> problem eased. >> >> ==== >> >> Not here. We were always told to wear masks. I think it was Mr Trump >> that said they weren't necessary >> >> >> >> > > >Of course you think that. But you are wrong. It was Dr. Fauci. You >know, the "gold standards" guy. LOL. and who was pulling the strings attached to the drs. rump. that's who |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2021-02-14 1:02 p.m., Graham wrote:
> On 2021-02-14 10:29 a.m., S Viemeister wrote: facts, so the conclusions should not be changing repeatedly. >>> >>> FFS!! Things change as you learn more!!! >> >> Indeed. >> Somewhere, I have an essay written by my molecular biologist niece on >> that very subject. >> > Shhhhh! Too many blocked ears and blinkered eyes around here! Who has the blocked ears and blinkered eyes? I do wear a mask in public spaces. I have never raised a stink about having to do it. I have never refused. As soon as I go out and am distanced from people it comes off. I simply expressed my objection to being told by the self righteous to follow the science when we were being told different stories every few days. As Taxed and Spent pointed out, they kept telling us we didn't need masks when there was a shortage of them. I don't need a tin foil hat. Some of the our questions were addressed in an article from the University of California San Francisco. It addressed the CDCs reversal on the advice to wear masks. It acknowledges that a shortage of masks had a lot to do with it. They wanted to reserve the masks for medical staff. The report goes on to talk about experiments where they did slo mo videos of people coughing and sneezing, and where the particles flew. They say now that we should wear masks, wash our hands and maintain distance, and, of the three, the most important is the mask. I find it hard to understand how it is that they have been using masks for years and it is not until covid19 that they started to wonder the best types and designs that are most effective at controlling the spread of cootie infected droplets. https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/41...-masks-prevent |
[OT] Don't do this!
On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 17:26:34 -0000, "Ophelia" >
wrote: > > >"Taxed and Spent" wrote in message ... > >On 2/14/2021 7:29 AM, Ophelia wrote: >> >> >> "Taxed and Spent" wrote in message ... >> >> On 2/14/2021 6:13 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>> >>> >>> "Gary" wrote in message ... >>> >>> On 2/14/2021 6:05 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>> Yes! I got mine over a week ago, and he got his yesterday! Just the >>>> first ones though! I get my second on the last week in April. He >>>> hasn't been told yet. >>> >>> Huh? I've heard that you need to get the second one in 2-3 weeks, not >>> months later. >>> >>> === >>> >>> That is how it started but it has lengthened now! They say it is >>> better! >>> >>> >> >> >> They say it is better because the logistics are screwed up (after local >> and state agencies knowing for over a year this was coming . . .) and >> this new story fits the logistics. No studies cited. >> >> You know, masks were unnecessary. Before they were, after the supply >> problem eased. >> >> ==== >> >> Not here. We were always told to wear masks. I think it was Mr >> Trump >> that said they weren't necessary >> > >Of course you think that. But you are wrong. It was Dr. Fauci. You >know, the "gold standards" guy. LOL. > >==== > > I have no intention of arguing about this. Was it, or was it not, Trump >who said masks were not necessary? > > You are correct, O. rump said it again and again and again. Janet US |
[OT] Don't do this!
On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 10:34:11 -0800, Taxed and Spent
> wrote: >On 2/14/2021 9:26 AM, Ophelia wrote: >> >> >> "Taxed and Spent" wrote in message ... >> >> On 2/14/2021 7:29 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>> >>> >>> "Taxed and Spent" wrote in message ... >>> >>> On 2/14/2021 6:13 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> "Gary" wrote in message ... >>>> >>>> On 2/14/2021 6:05 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>>> Yes! I got mine over a week ago, and he got his yesterday! Just the >>>>> first ones though! I get my second on the last week in April. He >>>>> hasn't been told yet. >>>> >>>> Huh? I've heard that you need to get the second one in 2-3 weeks, not >>>> months later. >>>> >>>> === >>>> >>>> That is how it started but it has lengthened now! They say it is >>>> better! >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> They say it is better because the logistics are screwed up (after local >>> and state agencies knowing for over a year this was coming . . .) and >>> this new story fits the logistics. No studies cited. >>> >>> You know, masks were unnecessary. Before they were, after the supply >>> problem eased. >>> >>> ==== >>> >>> Not here. We were always told to wear masks. I think it was Mr >>> Trump >>> that said they weren't necessary >>> >> >> Of course you think that. But you are wrong. It was Dr. Fauci. You >> know, the "gold standards" guy. LOL. >> >> ==== >> >> I have no intention of arguing about this. Was it, or was it not, Trump >> who said masks were not necessary? >> >> >> > > >Fauci said it. If Trump said it, I guess he was taking the advise of >our nation's most trusted medical advisor. Please read the following: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fa...longer-needed/ |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2/14/2021 11:20 AM, Janet wrote:
> In article >, says... >> >> On 2/14/2021 6:05 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>> Yes! I got mine over a week ago, and he got his yesterday! Just the >>> first ones though! I get my second on the last week in April. He >>> hasn't been told yet. >> >> Huh? I've heard that you need to get the second one in 2-3 weeks, not >> months later. > > The UK govt decided to extend the gap period so that they can > speedily vaccinate twice as many people in the highrisk groups. > > With the Oxford astro-zeneca vaccine, trials suggest that a longer gap > between the two shots offers increased immunity. Fingers crossed the > same will apply to the Pfizer vaccine. > > > The Pfizer vaccine trials didn't vary the gap between shots so no > results known yet. > > > https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n18 > > > Janet UK > " The trials of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine did include different spacing between doses, finding that a longer gap (two to three months) led to a greater immune response, but the overall participant numbers were small. In the UK study 59% (1407 of 2377) of the participants who had two standard doses received the second dose between nine and 12 weeks after the first. In the Brazil study only 18.6% (384 of 2063) received a second dose between nine and 12 weeks after the first.3 The combined trial results, published in the Lancet,4 found that vaccine efficacy 14 days after a second dose was higher in the group that had more than six weeks between the two doses (65.4%) than in the group that had less than six weeks between doses (53.4%)." Pretty small test group. Hmm. |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2021-02-14 12:20 p.m., Janet wrote:
> In article >, says... >> >> On 2/14/2021 6:05 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>> Yes! I got mine over a week ago, and he got his yesterday! Just the >>> first ones though! I get my second on the last week in April. He >>> hasn't been told yet. >> >> Huh? I've heard that you need to get the second one in 2-3 weeks, not >> months later. > > The UK govt decided to extend the gap period so that they can > speedily vaccinate twice as many people in the highrisk groups. > > With the Oxford astro-zeneca vaccine, trials suggest that a longer gap > between the two shots offers increased immunity. Fingers crossed the > same will apply to the Pfizer vaccine. > > > The Pfizer vaccine trials didn't vary the gap between shots so no > results known yet. > > > https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n18 > > > Janet UK > Too much science for this newsgroup, Janet! |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2/14/2021 11:25 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2021-02-14 1:02 p.m., Graham wrote: >> On 2021-02-14 10:29 a.m., S Viemeister wrote: > facts, so the conclusions should not be changing repeatedly. >>>> >>>> FFS!! Things change as you learn more!!! >>> >>> Indeed. >>> Somewhere, I have an essay written by my molecular biologist niece on >>> that very subject. >>> >> Shhhhh! Too many blocked ears and blinkered eyes around here! > > Who has the blocked ears and blinkered eyes? I do wear a mask in public > spaces. I have never raised a stink about having to do it. I have never > refused. As soon as I go out and am distanced from people it comes off. > > I simply expressed my objection to being told by the self righteous to > follow the science when we were being told different stories every few > days. As Taxed and Spent pointed out, they kept telling us we didn't > need masks when there was a shortage of them. > > > I don't need a tin foil hat. Some of the our questions were addressed > in an article from the University of California San Francisco. It > addressed the CDCs reversal on the advice to wear masks. It acknowledges > that a shortage of masks had a lot to do with it. They wanted to reserve > the masks for medical staff. The report goes on to talk about > experiments where they did slo mo videos of people coughing and > sneezing, and where the particles flew. > > They say now that we should wear masks, wash our hands and maintain > distance, and, of the three, the most important is the mask. > > I find it hard to understand how it is that they have been using masks > for years and it is not until covid19 that they started to wonder the > best types and designs that are most effective at controlling the spread > of cootie infected droplets. > > > > > > > > https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/41...-masks-prevent > "follow the science" simply means "do as you are told, when you are told." |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2/14/2021 11:26 AM, US Janet wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 10:34:11 -0800, Taxed and Spent > > wrote: > >> On 2/14/2021 9:26 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>> >>> >>> "Taxed and Spent" wrote in message ... >>> >>> On 2/14/2021 7:29 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> "Taxed and Spent" wrote in message ... >>>> >>>> On 2/14/2021 6:13 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Gary" wrote in message ... >>>>> >>>>> On 2/14/2021 6:05 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>>>> Yes! I got mine over a week ago, and he got his yesterday! Just the >>>>>> first ones though! I get my second on the last week in April. He >>>>>> hasn't been told yet. >>>>> >>>>> Huh? I've heard that you need to get the second one in 2-3 weeks, not >>>>> months later. >>>>> >>>>> === >>>>> >>>>> That is how it started but it has lengthened now! They say it is >>>>> better! >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> They say it is better because the logistics are screwed up (after local >>>> and state agencies knowing for over a year this was coming . . .) and >>>> this new story fits the logistics. No studies cited. >>>> >>>> You know, masks were unnecessary. Before they were, after the supply >>>> problem eased. >>>> >>>> ==== >>>> >>>> Not here. We were always told to wear masks. I think it was Mr >>>> Trump >>>> that said they weren't necessary >>>> >>> >>> Of course you think that. But you are wrong. It was Dr. Fauci. You >>> know, the "gold standards" guy. LOL. >>> >>> ==== >>> >>> I have no intention of arguing about this. Was it, or was it not, Trump >>> who said masks were not necessary? >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> Fauci said it. If Trump said it, I guess he was taking the advise of >> our nation's most trusted medical advisor. > > Please read the following: > https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fa...longer-needed/ > Funny that they left out the fact that Fauci admitted that he lied. LIED, not just changed advice. |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2021-02-14 12:25 p.m., Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2021-02-14 1:02 p.m., Graham wrote: >> On 2021-02-14 10:29 a.m., S Viemeister wrote: > facts, so the conclusions should not be changing repeatedly. >>>> >>>> FFS!! Things change as you learn more!!! >>> >>> Indeed. >>> Somewhere, I have an essay written by my molecular biologist niece on >>> that very subject. >>> >> Shhhhh! Too many blocked ears and blinkered eyes around here! > > Who has the blocked ears and blinkered eyes?* I do wear a mask in public > spaces. I have never raised a stink about having to do it. I have never > refused.* As soon as I go out and am distanced from people it comes off. > > I simply expressed my objection to being told by the self righteous to > follow the science when we were being told different stories every few > days. That's due to the appallingly low level of science journalism! Most report National Enquirer-type titbits with no informed discussion. |
[OT] Don't do this!
On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 14:25:09 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote: snip > >I simply expressed my objection to being told by the self righteous to >follow the science when we were being told different stories every few >days. As Taxed and Spent pointed out, they kept telling us we didn't >need masks when there was a shortage of them. that was a short period of time and referred specificlly to N95 masks that were needed for health personnel. Janet US |
[OT] Don't do this!
On Sunday, February 14, 2021 at 2:31:50 PM UTC-5, Taxed and Spent wrote:
> On 2/14/2021 11:25 AM, Dave Smith wrote: > > On 2021-02-14 1:02 p.m., Graham wrote: > >> On 2021-02-14 10:29 a.m., S Viemeister wrote: > > facts, so the conclusions should not be changing repeatedly. > >>>> > >>>> FFS!! Things change as you learn more!!! > >>> > >>> Indeed. > >>> Somewhere, I have an essay written by my molecular biologist niece on > >>> that very subject. > >>> > >> Shhhhh! Too many blocked ears and blinkered eyes around here! > > > > Who has the blocked ears and blinkered eyes? I do wear a mask in public > > spaces. I have never raised a stink about having to do it. I have never > > refused. As soon as I go out and am distanced from people it comes off. > > > > I simply expressed my objection to being told by the self righteous to > > follow the science when we were being told different stories every few > > days. As Taxed and Spent pointed out, they kept telling us we didn't > > need masks when there was a shortage of them. > > > > > > I don't need a tin foil hat. Some of the our questions were addressed > > in an article from the University of California San Francisco. It > > addressed the CDCs reversal on the advice to wear masks. It acknowledges > > that a shortage of masks had a lot to do with it. They wanted to reserve > > the masks for medical staff. The report goes on to talk about > > experiments where they did slo mo videos of people coughing and > > sneezing, and where the particles flew. > > > > They say now that we should wear masks, wash our hands and maintain > > distance, and, of the three, the most important is the mask. > > > > I find it hard to understand how it is that they have been using masks > > for years and it is not until covid19 that they started to wonder the > > best types and designs that are most effective at controlling the spread > > of cootie infected droplets. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/41...-masks-prevent > > > > > "follow the science" simply means "do as you are told, when you are told." And oh, my God! That's the end of the world, isn't it? Doing as you're told. You sound like a two-year-old. Cindy Hamilton |
[OT] Don't do this!
|
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2/14/2021 11:37 AM, US Janet wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 14:25:09 -0500, Dave Smith > > wrote: > > snip >> >> I simply expressed my objection to being told by the self righteous to >> follow the science when we were being told different stories every few >> days. As Taxed and Spent pointed out, they kept telling us we didn't >> need masks when there was a shortage of them. > > that was a short period of time and referred specificlly to N95 masks > that were needed for health personnel. > > Janet US > A lie, nonetheless. And I don't think the lie was limited to N95 masks. |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2021-02-14 2:36 p.m., Graham wrote:
> On 2021-02-14 12:25 p.m., Dave Smith wrote: >> On 2021-02-14 1:02 p.m., Graham wrote: t comes off. >> >> I simply expressed my objection to being told by the self righteous to >> follow the science when we were being told different stories every few >> days. > > That's due to the appallingly low level of science journalism! Most > report National Enquirer-type titbits with no informed discussion. There must be some level of science journalism because off those self righteous dinks were telling other people to follow the science. Apparently they were privy to some research data that the rest of us could not find. |
[OT] Don't do this!
|
[OT] Don't do this!
David Crossley wrote:
> In article >, says... > > > > On 2021-02-14 12:25 p.m., Dave Smith wrote: > > > On 2021-02-14 1:02 p.m., Graham wrote: > > >> On 2021-02-14 10:29 a.m., S Viemeister wrote: > > > facts, so the conclusions should not be changing repeatedly. > > >>>> > > >>>> FFS!! Things change as you learn more!!! > > >>> > > >>> Indeed. > > >>> Somewhere, I have an essay written by my molecular biologist niece on > > >>> that very subject. > > >>> > > >> Shhhhh! Too many blocked ears and blinkered eyes around here! > > > > > > Who has the blocked ears and blinkered eyes? I do wear a mask in public > > > spaces. I have never raised a stink about having to do it. I have never > > > refused. As soon as I go out and am distanced from people it comes off. > > > > > > I simply expressed my objection to being told by the self righteous to > > > follow the science when we were being told different stories every few > > > days. > > > > That's due to the appallingly low level of science journalism! Most > > report National Enquirer-type titbits with no informed discussion. > > > Wrong, Fauci admitted he lied in order to try and prevent > a massive run on N95 masks, he wanted to save them for > the first responders and medical people at the time. No worries...Graham *never* lets *facts* get in the way of his *reasoning*... -- Best Greg |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2021-02-14 2:37 p.m., US Janet wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 14:25:09 -0500, Dave Smith > > wrote: > > snip >> >> I simply expressed my objection to being told by the self righteous to >> follow the science when we were being told different stories every few >> days. As Taxed and Spent pointed out, they kept telling us we didn't >> need masks when there was a shortage of them. > > that was a short period of time and referred specificlly to N95 masks > that were needed for health personnel. > At first they were happy with a mask. Then it was suggested that the mask have two layers. Recently they have been pushing for a three layer mask. |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2021-02-14 12:43 p.m., Taxed and Spent wrote:
> On 2/14/2021 11:37 AM, US Janet wrote: >> On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 14:25:09 -0500, Dave Smith >> > wrote: >> >> snip >>> >>> I simply expressed my objection to being told by the self righteous to >>> follow the science when we were being told different stories every few >>> days. As Taxed and Spent pointed out, they* kept telling us we didn't >>> need masks when there was a shortage of them. >> >> * that was a short period of time and referred specificlly to N95 masks >> that were needed for health personnel. >> >> Janet US >> > > > A lie, nonetheless. And I don't think the lie was limited to N95 masks. How many lies did Trump tell during his sojourn? And you are getting your knickers in a twist over just this ONE? |
[OT] Don't do this!
Graham wrote:
> On 2021-02-14 12:41 p.m., David Crossley wrote: > > In article >, says... > >> > >> On 2021-02-14 12:25 p.m., Dave Smith wrote: > >>> On 2021-02-14 1:02 p.m., Graham wrote: > >>>> On 2021-02-14 10:29 a.m., S Viemeister wrote: > >>> facts, so the conclusions should not be changing repeatedly. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> FFS!! Things change as you learn more!!! > >>>>> > >>>>> Indeed. > >>>>> Somewhere, I have an essay written by my molecular biologist niece on > >>>>> that very subject. > >>>>> > >>>> Shhhhh! Too many blocked ears and blinkered eyes around here! > >>> > >>> Who has the blocked ears and blinkered eyes? I do wear a mask in public > >>> spaces. I have never raised a stink about having to do it. I have never > >>> refused. As soon as I go out and am distanced from people it comes off. > >>> > >>> I simply expressed my objection to being told by the self righteous to > >>> follow the science when we were being told different stories every few > >>> days. > >> > >> That's due to the appallingly low level of science journalism! Most > >> report National Enquirer-type titbits with no informed discussion. > >> > > Wrong, Fauci admitted he lied in order to try and prevent > > a massive run on N95 masks, he wanted to save them for > > the first responders and medical people at the time. > > -- > > Regards > > David Crossley > > > And you see this as a capital crime? You are "grasping at straws" here now, Graham... -- Best Greg |
[OT] Don't do this!
On Sunday, February 14, 2021 at 2:47:15 PM UTC-5, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2021-02-14 2:37 p.m., US Janet wrote: > > On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 14:25:09 -0500, Dave Smith > > > wrote: > > > > snip > >> > >> I simply expressed my objection to being told by the self righteous to > >> follow the science when we were being told different stories every few > >> days. As Taxed and Spent pointed out, they kept telling us we didn't > >> need masks when there was a shortage of them. > > > > that was a short period of time and referred specificlly to N95 masks > > that were needed for health personnel. > > > At first they were happy with a mask. Something is better than nothing. > Then it was suggested that the > mask have two layers. Two somethings are better than one something. > Recently they have been pushing for a three layer > mask. With the advent of more-transmissible strains, I can see why they'd recommend additional protection. Cindy Hamilton |
[OT] Don't do this!
On 2021-02-14 12:49 p.m., Graham wrote:
> On 2021-02-14 12:43 p.m., Taxed and Spent wrote: >> On 2/14/2021 11:37 AM, US Janet wrote: >>> On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 14:25:09 -0500, Dave Smith >>> > wrote: >>> >>> snip >>>> >>>> I simply expressed my objection to being told by the self righteous to >>>> follow the science when we were being told different stories every few >>>> days. As Taxed and Spent pointed out, they* kept telling us we didn't >>>> need masks when there was a shortage of them. >>> >>> * that was a short period of time and referred specificlly to N95 masks >>> that were needed for health personnel. >>> >>> Janet US >>> >> >> >> A lie, nonetheless. And I don't think the lie was limited to N95 masks. > > How many lies did Trump tell during his sojourn? And you are getting > your knickers in a twist over just this ONE? From Snopes: In the March 2020 clip, Fauci said: Right now in the United States people should not be walking around with masks You should think of healthcare providers who are needing them and the people who are ill. |
[OT] Don't do this!
Bruce wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 10:34:11 -0800, Taxed and Spent > > wrote: > >> On 2/14/2021 9:26 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>> >>> >>> "Taxed and Spent" wrote in message ... >>> >>> On 2/14/2021 7:29 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> "Taxed and Spent" wrote in message ... >>>> >>>> On 2/14/2021 6:13 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Gary" wrote in message ... >>>>> >>>>> On 2/14/2021 6:05 AM, Ophelia wrote: >>>>>> Yes! I got mine over a week ago, and he got his yesterday! Just the >>>>>> first ones though! I get my second on the last week in April. He >>>>>> hasn't been told yet. >>>>> >>>>> Huh? I've heard that you need to get the second one in 2-3 weeks, not >>>>> months later. >>>>> >>>>> === >>>>> >>>>> That is how it started but it has lengthened now! They say it is >>>>> better! >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> They say it is better because the logistics are screwed up (after local >>>> and state agencies knowing for over a year this was coming . . .) and >>>> this new story fits the logistics. No studies cited. >>>> >>>> You know, masks were unnecessary. Before they were, after the supply >>>> problem eased. >>>> >>>> ==== >>>> >>>> Not here. We were always told to wear masks. I think it was Mr >>>> Trump >>>> that said they weren't necessary >>>> >>> >>> Of course you think that. But you are wrong. It was Dr. Fauci. You >>> know, the "gold standards" guy. LOL. >>> >>> ==== >>> >>> I have no intention of arguing about this. Was it, or was it not, Trump >>> who said masks were not necessary? >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> Fauci said it. If Trump said it, I guess he was taking the advise of >> our nation's most trusted medical advisor. > > Trump always tried to downplay covid. He was afraid the pandemic would > affect the economy and the economy was his ticket to re-election. He > didn't care how many people died in the meantime. Narcissism..., right > Bryan? > Congrats! A successful double sniff. |
[OT] Don't do this!
In article >, says...
> > On 2021-02-14 12:41 p.m., David Crossley wrote: > > In article >, says... > >> > >> On 2021-02-14 12:25 p.m., Dave Smith wrote: > >>> On 2021-02-14 1:02 p.m., Graham wrote: > >>>> On 2021-02-14 10:29 a.m., S Viemeister wrote: > >>> facts, so the conclusions should not be changing repeatedly. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> FFS!! Things change as you learn more!!! > >>>>> > >>>>> Indeed. > >>>>> Somewhere, I have an essay written by my molecular biologist niece on > >>>>> that very subject. > >>>>> > >>>> Shhhhh! Too many blocked ears and blinkered eyes around here! > >>> > >>> Who has the blocked ears and blinkered eyes?* I do wear a mask in public > >>> spaces. I have never raised a stink about having to do it. I have never > >>> refused.* As soon as I go out and am distanced from people it comes off. > >>> > >>> I simply expressed my objection to being told by the self righteous to > >>> follow the science when we were being told different stories every few > >>> days. > >> > >> That's due to the appallingly low level of science journalism! Most > >> report National Enquirer-type titbits with no informed discussion. > >> > > Wrong, Fauci admitted he lied in order to try and prevent > > a massive run on N95 masks, he wanted to save them for > > the first responders and medical people at the time. > > -- > > Regards > > David Crossley > > > And you see this as a capital crime? > No Dimmy, I see it for exactly what it is, a life threatening lie. -- Regards David Crossley |
[OT] Don't do this!
Graham wrote:
> On 2021-02-14 12:43 p.m., Taxed and Spent wrote: > > On 2/14/2021 11:37 AM, US Janet wrote: > >> On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 14:25:09 -0500, Dave Smith > >> > wrote: > >> > >> snip > >>> > >>> I simply expressed my objection to being told by the self righteous to > >>> follow the science when we were being told different stories every few > >>> days. As Taxed and Spent pointed out, they kept telling us we didn't > >>> need masks when there was a shortage of them. > >> > >> that was a short period of time and referred specificlly to N95 masks > >> that were needed for health personnel. > >> > >> Janet US > >> > > > > > > A lie, nonetheless. And I don't think the lie was limited to N95 masks. > How many lies did Trump tell during his sojourn? And you are getting > your knickers in a twist over just this ONE? Ah, we see that when Graham is "cornered" in a discussion, he of course resorts to some airy - fairy non - sequitur involving "Trump"... Lol... -- Best Greg |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:40 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FoodBanter