Accountability Now

My arguments to date have been for data in Ontario and Alberta as those are the two that I have chosen to follow. But lets just look at Bubber's home province of Manitoba. 74.7% fully vaxxed are incurring 81.3% of the cases. Man those vaccines are REALLY stopping, preventing, halting, reducing spread. Hospital numbers on the rise too....58.5% of hosptalizations. 60% of ICU. The only category that still favors the vaxxed is deaths but again....97% of deaths occur with people that have pre-existing conditions. However we can't add another metric into this already confusing argument. ?

Dude...the only thing you won today was Most Idiotic Post. Please come back when you can argue honestly and with integrity

What F'n delusion are you on to now??? I showed you the number of ACTIVE cases in Ontario being ~80% in the fully vaxxed. You're telling me those ACTIVE cases aren't the ones spreading Covid??? ??

Nope. I posted his exact response to the exact original post. I never omitted anything but keep trying. If you want I will screen shot it AGAIN so that you can process it.

I can always tell when someone is backed into a corner as they don't actually tag the other person on their reply. They hope they can sneak one past them in an unscrupulous manner. Well done Bubber, you win the Lack of Integrity Award today. Having said that, I can't continue to hold your hand on this. You clearly stated things and I pointed them out as obvious mistakes. If you can't deal with it then take your ball and go home. Come back when you have the big boy pants on and are able to debate honestly and rationally.

Dude. We were talking spread and not hospitalizations. Stop lying and gain one ounce of integrity already.

Interesting....this dictionary disagrees with you Interesting....both of you geniuses forgot to look at where Bubber's post says "excellent job of" You were so infatuated with finding a semantical error in order to salvage one last hope for salvaging your mistake however even that is blown off its hinges when you put "excellent job". When 100 people get covid and the vaccinated make up 82% of those cases but only 79% of them are vaccinated.....you think this is an "excellent job of preventing" spread. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh man...you guys are just pure beauties today. Keep the laughs coming...its a slow day at work and I'm enjoying this.

Jus to add to this....England was actually keeping decent data on this for a while now. They would mark someone in the hospital with COVID as being Inclusion Case and someone hospitalized because of COVID as an Exclusion Case. For both unvaxxed and double vaxxed, it seemed to be roughly 30% drop from inclusion to exclusion. Now...this was for Delta and was in the UK. If it remains true for Canada and with Omicron, then we might expect that a certain reduction on the vaxxed side will see roughly the same reduction on the unvaxxed side. Wait to see though.

100% agree on this. I wish proper data would be provided across the board. Ontario and Alberta have both said they were going to start tracking this but I haven't seen numbers yet.

67% of people in Ontario.

Come on Bubber. Have a bit of integrity. You made the claim, were caught in the lie and now refuse to admit you are wrong. Grow a set and accept you are wrong instead of making a preposterous claim about which one of us understands English. What you said was put right in your face and yet you still play the part of the idiot. Be better than that. If you want to go on to discuss other aspects of this conversation then I suggest you learn how to debate honestly.

Not only that he has blatantly lied about his claim of vaccines stopping spread. His integrity on this forum is next to zero.

LMAFO. So you just stated above that you never made the claim. I showed you did in fact make that claim and now you are going back to saying your original claim is in tact??? You are either being willfully dishonest or you are completely delusional. You pick but I think its fair for everyone on this forum to see that your opinion means nothing.

Also....the key thing about the data isn't what its saying today...its what the trends have been. Ontario has 79% of its population vaxxed and that same group makes up 67% of the hospitalizations. That percentage used to be in the 20s and 30s and is quickly growing. Even if you look at just today in Ontario, the vaccines are only marginally protecting people from going to the hospital. That is of course if you still consider hospitalizations to only be a binary dependent on vaccination rather than including other factors like obesity, age and other variables.

The problem with a written forum is that its really easy to prove someone wrong with things they have said. Want to reconsider your claim based on this:

Aside from your clear deflection from my question, I will cite my claims as per your request. Now...for the second time...is the vaccine stopping spread of the virus. If not, then please delete your claim and stop spewing misinformation. Alberta Stats as of January 3: https://www.alberta.ca/stats/covid-19-alberta-statistics.htm#vaccine-outcomes Ontario Stats as of today: https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data/hospitalizations

So you agree it is not stopping the spread? If so, then why are you saying it does? Also, Ontario’s hospitals currently have 66% fully vaxxed when over a week ago it was at 30. Alberta now has more vaxxed people in the hospital than unvaxxed and that percentage is moving as well

You aren't really following the numbers are you? The cases per 100k are now more for the vaccinated than unvaccinated (in Ontario at least, as well as Alberta). The vaccines are not preventing spread at all.

I have been arguing this for months now. I see all sorts of news reports talking about the number of unvaxxed deaths when most of those deaths happened before the vaccines were even out. Anyone who knows anything about science knows you need a control variable to properly assess something. You can't use this data when the vaccines weren't in play as there is no control variable.

Just like the cases, those numbers are changing here too...just like the UK. Ontario's current hospitalization has 66% fully vaxxed. You will start to see that number go higher there and across the country. I have no problem admitting that the vaccine works but only for so long. For the first two doses it was about 5-6 months. Now they are saying with the booster it lasts 10 weeks. It might be tough convincing people to continue with this.

I'm not sure if you saw Ontario's hospitalization numbers today but there were 605 total with 399 being fully vaccinated. That makes for 66% fully vaxxed and 30% unvaxxed. For these numbers to have any meaning to the lay person, you would need to see an 80/20 split to represent the vaccination percentages. However, like I have said for months now, the change in these rates have been trending this way for a while now. First it was the case numbers, which are completely skewed towards the vaxxed at this point, and now its the hospitalizations leaning towards to the vaxxed. Soon it will be heavily skewed as well. Only the ICU numbers still show the unvaxxed as being the issue however I'm guessing that will change soon too. At that point the mandates need to end immediately. https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data/hospitalizations

So the two points I'm getting from your study (and please feel free to correct or add more): 1. A good percentage of breaktrough hospitalizations cases occur in elderly and those with pre-existing conditions - is this exactly who the vaccine is supposed to be protecting????? 2. Some people with Covid hospitalizations may actually be there for other non-Covid related reasons - i posted in this thread last night a link showing that Ontario is going to start breaking out these numbers to show who is actually in the hospital because of Covid. The UK has been doing this for a while now and it is shown that 20-30% of the hospitalizations were people in the hospital but happen to have Covid too. With Omicron that number could be substantially higher as a lot of people are presenting asymptomatic or very mild cases. I am fine with the restrictions I have had to put up with. If I really want to go out to a restaurant or a game then I'll get a rapid test. Luckily my employment has not been affected by this however I know a few people that have lost their jobs. What is despicable is people thinking its ok take away people's jobs (ie their way to provide for their families) and then compare it to having to stop at red lights. I clearly remember you whining numerous times about how Ottawa handles the fisheries where you live. Yet you have no problem with governments cramming health choices down our throats. I get it. You clearly find yourself on the losing end of this debate which makes you hold on tight to the one semantical argument you think you have. However, until a month ago kids under 12 weren't even allowed to get the shot. At this point only 14% of American kids in that age demographic have had their second shot (which is where we see the majority of myocarditis occur). It will take months of continued vaccination in this age demographic for a study to be able to show results. The study I showed took the age demographic 12-17 and found highest incidents of adverse effects in 12-15 males. They also found high enough adverse effects in the 16-17 range among males with no preexisting conditions that made the vaccine riskier than not taking it. This study did take into account ALL kids that were at that time allowed to take the vaccine. The reason you keep coming back to is to stop transmission. I would have been first in line to get the vaccine if it actually stopped or significantly reduced transmission but it doesn't. And this isn't just based on Omicron but on Delta which was hitting Israel and the UK before vaccines were available in my age group. It was clear from the data that ensued that breakthrough cases kept rising as the vaccines waned meaning the idea of transmission was short lived and therefore the vaccine was not going to stop anything but only delay the inevitable. I too hold hope for Omicron. Hope that hospitalizations stay low and people can finally calm the F down and stop being so scared of living.

However, that depends on the actual reason the "unvaccinated' were actually there. It looks like Ontario is going to start distinguishing between people in the hospital because of COVID and people in the hospital for other reasons and just so happen to have COVID as well. Truth be told, this may actually remove more vaccinated hospitalizations off the tally but at least the numbers they give us will be accurate. They have been accounting UK hospitalizations this way for a while now....surprised (but not really) that Canada is so far behind!

One possibility? Maybe when they first thought it was a real vaccine however as data poured in from Israel and the UK, governments quickly realized that transmission was still going to happen within vaccinated people. Whether you call it hind sight or a planned action, vaccinating kids was never going to be for the 'greater good' Clearly you don't follow the UK data very closely. Even with Delta, the percentage of cases, hospitalizations and deaths really started to flip in relation to vaxxed versus unvaxxed, particularly in the OVER 50 category (which as we know is the most vulnerable). The UK started their vaccinations in spring and by September, 84% of cases, 78% of hospitalizations and 74% of deaths were with the fully vaccinated in that period. All due to Delta and the waning effect of the vaccines. This is why Israel had already adminsterd their 3rd shot and the UK started pushing for it. Even if Omicron didn't come around, we would still see fully vaxxed people leading the cases and possibly the hospitalizations come January. Not if those who are fully vaccinated have vaccines that waned. Or if they are dealing with Omicron. In both cases the vaccinated are just as good of spreaders as the unvaccinated. Right....coercion is not force? So if I put a gun to your head and say give me your wallet, I can say I didn't force you to give me your wallet...your hand went into your pocket and handed it to me. Its not like I took your wallet from your pocket. Same here. You take away people's jobs and other activities and say "oh but its your choice!!!" I'm surprised your self proclaimed BS meter can't pick up the shit smell on that one. Holy F. I also never talked about kids under 5 either. I provided a scientific source that accounts for the one cohort. This was in addition to other topics you had already discussed with WestCanMan and the general knowledge that every vaccine has the chance for side effects. So when the risk of severe disease from Covid is low then it doesn't take a genius to understand even a low risk from vaccine injury would be close to offset that perceived benefit. Just to be clear, various European countries stopped using Moderna in ALL children for this same perceived risk. Even Ontario advised against using it. The vaccines cause X amount of risk via injury. That is beyond dispute. So again why vaccinate healthy kids who have very little risk of severe infection from Covid but are now subjected to a risk from the injury.

So you completely bypass objectivity and take a hard right turn toward emotions. Well played. I trust that gets you far with most arguments? The simple fact is you need to have context with these news reports. There are 80% more….did you know that 2 is 100% more than 1. If the Covid hospitalizations were extremely low to start with then at what point does it become significant? 80% more? 500% more?