Guess who our government is giving Ivermectin? Refugees

Here's what he said closely transcribed:

…and then all of this new information has rolled out, and in particular the Israeli data having to do with an increasing number of infections and hospitalizations. At first it was positioned that this was only occurring in the unvaccinated cohort, and then that became increasingly untenable, and it became clear that it was occurring in the vaccinated cohort, and then the same became true with the U.K. data set, which is stronger than the American monitoring system, and they do a lot more sequencing. So now we have this paradox. Those that had been vaccinated, the data suggest that they're largely protected from disease and death, and more protected than the unvaccinated from disease and death, but they are no longer protected from infection. In the end it became clear within the data through multiple sources, that the levels of virus replication in the individuals even who had been vaccinated previously was the same or higher as the levels of virus replication in those that had been unvaccinated, and that those that had been vaccinated and had breakthrough infections were also shedding virus, and able to spread virus. So then that raised the prospect that they were kind of the new super spreaders because they would have less apparent disease, and yet still be shedding high levels of virus. Then we started to see some signs suggesting that there may be some differences in the nature or onset or triggers of disease in those that had been infected beyond six months after their vaccination point, so this is the waning phase.

In other words, if you’re vaccinated you’re safer than if you’re unvaccinated. There are of course exceptions, which is why I always add: unless you're allergic or prone or blood clots. However, being vaccinated doesn’t mean you can’t catch it and spread it. Although many studies indicate that the potential length of time an infected vaccinated individual can spread it is lower (which may not apply to Delta), it’s still spread by the vaccinated, and possibly in a more potent form in rare cases. The reason for this is that just like with the barely effective cloth masks most people wear, people are lured into a false sense of security and end up spreading it to more people than they otherwise would have because they incorrectly believe being vaccinated not only protects them, but those around them.

So I repeat, “It touches on points both sides make, but neither side wants to hear.” And yes, he mentions that paper that made a false equivalency. What he’s saying there is that in their zeal to oversell the effectiveness of the vaccines with regards to spreading the virus, they obfuscated that potential negative (i.e. their ability to stop the spread vs. what was first hoped), intentionally or otherwise, with a pile of rubble about the unvaccinated, his point being that the spread is as much with the vaccinated as the unvaccinated, which is counter to the narrative pushed by certain parties, mostly coming from the Left.

Bottom line: most individuals are better off being vaccinated. Just don’t over-vaccinate. And continue to socially distance, because it’s not very effective against impeding spread.

I find it so interesting when people blinded by at least a small degree of bias listen to someone speaking without bias. They cherry-pick the portions that support their biased belief while ignoring everything that contradicts it. Kind of like a Rorschach test.

Reality is always somewhere in between. Always.
_________________________________________
Never believe. Always question. Rebuke belief, a.k.a. bias, a.k.a. groupthink, a.k.a. ideology, the bane of skeptical, logical reason.

reply share

add reply

formatting help