Toronto Passions

Moving up appointments

squeezer

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2010
22,119
17,181
113
I would imagine this will change soon from FDA approved to approved in your country.
Our PM was just in the same room as their President, both maskless and ours I believe has had only 1 shot of AZ so far.
Yes, Justin, Tory and Ford all have had their first dose of AZ.
 

rgkv

old timer
Nov 14, 2005
4,079
1,620
113
This is a bad sign: it means the vaccine does not produce the antibodies it is supposed to
I kinda like to believe it's just me./. I never have a headache, I never get the flue, Cant even remember the last time I was sick..never get a cold. BUT, I have broken bones, been sliced and diced for operations, I used to cut myself at work every friggen day it seemed. was always healing so....My body just accepts it and lets move along now...
 
Last edited:

fall

Well-known member
Dec 9, 2010
2,740
680
113
Wrong! Why do some throw-out bullshit? Oh, I know, you read it on Facebook or on Twitter so it must be true.


just in case you do not trust India.com

Actually, it is from .gov website (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/expect/after.html): " In most cases, discomfort from pain or fever is a normal sign that your body is building protection", so, a natural conclusion is that the absence of these normal signs that "your body is building protection" indicated that the probability that that vaccine was not effective for you higher than it would have been if you would have had this discomfort. P.S.: I do not use twitter, facebook, or any social media.
 

fall

Well-known member
Dec 9, 2010
2,740
680
113
Wrong! Why do some throw-out bullshit? Oh, I know, you read it on Facebook or on Twitter so it must be true.


just in case you do not trust India.com

And this is from Forbes: (https://www.forbes.com/sites/alison...py-to-get-symptoms-from-the-covid-19-vaccine/)

"One of the most common reasons people develop fears of vaccines has to do with a common misunderstanding about side effects. But what most of the public doesn’t know is that doctors who have been vaccinated against Covid-19 were delighted when the vaccine gave them symptoms.

When doctors got sore arms, fatigue, muscle aches or fevers after their Covid-19 vaccine, they celebrated. That’s because those symptoms are not dangerous ‘reactions,’ but positive signs that the immune system is responding to the vaccine. Feeling yucky after the Covid-19 vaccine means it’s working. "
 

squeezer

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2010
22,119
17,181
113
Actually, it is from .gov website (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/expect/after.html): " In most cases, discomfort from pain or fever is a normal sign that your body is building protection", so, a natural conclusion is that the absence of these normal signs that "your body is building protection" indicated that the probability that that vaccine was not effective for you higher than it would have been if you would have had this discomfort. P.S.: I do not use twitter, facebook, or any social media.
I agree side effects is normal but you are completely wrong believing no side effect means it' s not working, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG because no side effects is also normal!

 

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
35,098
67,655
113
I have just gone on the waiting list for a second dose Phizer after my first dose AZ.
Going over some of the research coming out it seems that a first dose AZ followed by an MRNA at 8 weeks gives more resistance to variants than two doses of MRNA.
That research still looks pretty thin to me.

I would imagine this will change soon from FDA approved to approved in your country.
Our PM was just in the same room as their President, both maskless and ours I believe has had only 1 shot of AZ so far.
The FDA is not going to ever approve Astra Zeneca, I think. Or not for a long time. They have no reason to rush it.
They will probably include it in some sort of definition of "fully vaccinated" though. Too many people from other countries using it.
 

fall

Well-known member
Dec 9, 2010
2,740
680
113
I agree side effects is normal but you are completely wrong believing no side effect means it' s not working, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG because no side effects is also normal!

Can you read??? I did not say it "means it is not working", I said it is a bad sign. For people show skipped basic probability class in school: What I am saying is that conditional probability P(vaccine works | side effects) is large that unconditional probability P(vaccine works) , which, in turn, is larger than conditional probability P(vaccine works | no side effect). Please, learn basic math and the definition of the word "sign" as it is used in medicine (and any other science) to avoid making fool of yourself. Everything is "normal", but it affects the ex-post probability. so, again, having no side effect is a bad sign (reduce the probability) and having side effect is a good sign (increases the probability). Both are "normal", but one is better than another
 

benstt

Well-known member
Jan 20, 2004
1,605
469
83
Can you read??? I did not say it "means it is not working", I said it is a bad sign. For people show skipped basic probability class in school: What I am saying is that conditional probability P(vaccine works | side effects) is large that unconditional probability P(vaccine works) , which, in turn, is larger than conditional probability P(vaccine works | no side effect). Please, learn basic math and the definition of the word "sign" as it is used in medicine (and any other science) to avoid making fool of yourself. Everything is "normal", but it affects the ex-post probability. so, again, having no side effect is a bad sign (reduce the probability) and having side effect is a good sign (increases the probability). Both are "normal", but one is better than another
This is the complete conditional probability breakdown:
P(vaccine works) = P(vaccine works | no side effects) x P(no side effects) + P(vaccine works | side effects) x P(side effects)

I think you are trying to say with your sentence that:

P(vaccine works | side effects) > P(vaccine works) > P(vaccine works | side no effects)

which I don't see offhand as being necessarily true by the conditional probability math alone. The unconditional P(vaccine works) will lie between those two conditional probabilities, but I think you are assuming the order of the inequality from the beginning and are assuming that the difference is significant.

Ie saying that it is a bad sign requires data, not just a spiel about probabilities.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
62,644
7,076
113
This is the complete conditional probability breakdown:
P(vaccine works) = P(vaccine works | no side effects) x P(no side effects) + P(vaccine works | side effects) x P(side effects)

I think you are trying to say with your sentence that:

P(vaccine works | side effects) > P(vaccine works) > P(vaccine works | side no effects)

which I don't see offhand as being necessarily true by the conditional probability math alone. The unconditional P(vaccine works) will lie between those two conditional probabilities, but I think you are assuming the order of the inequality from the beginning and are assuming that the difference is significant.

Ie saying that it is a bad sign requires data, not just a spiel about probabilities.
And of course the whole thing about math being an attempt to approximate reality and not a defining rule for how vaccinations work.
 

squeezer

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2010
22,119
17,181
113
Can you read??? I did not say it "means it is not working", I said it is a bad sign.
I can't read, interesting.

This is a bad sign: it means the vaccine does not produce the antibodies it is supposed to
This to me is saying it doesn't work as intended but hey if your English translates differently I guess you must live in TJs head as well.

Notice I didn't include the rest of your false bullshit and nonsensical quote.
 
Toronto Escorts