Trump got the vaccine available in record time, took it, and recommends it. Trump isn’t a factor.
The analysis isn't saying Trump is the factor.
It is saying Trump voters are the factor.
Trump is smart enough to get vaccinated.
The same isn't true for a large % of his voting base.
Or more Democrats are of the youthful
First doubting response that actually makes a valid point about whetther or not this analysis controlled for age. I've always suspected that not all Trump fans were dumbshits.
That said, I'd be surprised if age by itself was the main issue here -- I'd bet $100 that it is mainly due to vaccination rates.
4 x higher death rate is significant.
Seems significant on the surface and framing, really isn’t when you are talking tiny numbers. Smart people avoid the % increase talking points on tiny baselines.
I see that math and science aren't your strong points.
Recently laughed a sales guy out of the room that touted that 25% growth on a $50k customer was a huge success when he didn’t spend much time talking about the customer that grew 5% on a $2m base and had a 15% growth target.
I’m a contribution dollar guy but maybe that’s just me.
Which means nothing in reference to biostats.
47 / 100000 compared to 10 / 1000000 is stastically significant in science.
Sales guys might use numbers but there is a reason you're in sales and not in the sciences.
Lol at your claim of what is statistically significant.
Trump got the vaccine available in record time, took it, and recommends it. Trump isn’t a factor.
The analysis isn't saying Trump is the factor.
It is saying Trump voters are the factor.
Trump is smart enough to get vaccinated.
The same isn't true for a large % of his voting base.
Or more Democrats are of the youthful
First doubting response that actually makes a valid point about whetther or not this analysis controlled for age. I've always suspected that not all Trump fans were dumbshits.
That said, I'd be surprised if age by itself was the main issue here -- I'd bet $100 that it is mainly due to vaccination rates.
4 x higher death rate is significant.
Seems significant on the surface and framing, really isn’t when you are talking tiny numbers. Smart people avoid the % increase talking points on tiny baselines.
I see that math and science aren't your strong points.
Recently laughed a sales guy out of the room that touted that 25% growth on a $50k customer was a huge success when he didn’t spend much time talking about the customer that grew 5% on a $2m base and had a 15% growth target.
I’m a contribution dollar guy but maybe that’s just me.
Which means nothing in reference to biostats.
47 / 100000 compared to 10 / 1000000 is stastically significant in science.
Sales guys might use numbers but there is a reason you're in sales and not in the sciences.
Lol at your claim of what is statistically significant.
Says the sales person...
Be sure to upsell those folks at your drive up window the super size.
Trump got the vaccine available in record time, took it, and recommends it. Trump isn’t a factor.
The analysis isn't saying Trump is the factor.
It is saying Trump voters are the factor.
Trump is smart enough to get vaccinated.
The same isn't true for a large % of his voting base.
Or more Democrats are of the youthful
First doubting response that actually makes a valid point about whetther or not this analysis controlled for age. I've always suspected that not all Trump fans were dumbshits.
That said, I'd be surprised if age by itself was the main issue here -- I'd bet $100 that it is mainly due to vaccination rates.
4 x higher death rate is significant.
Co-morbidities?
Obesity/Type 2 diabetes rates : Southern states vs. rest of country?
So what you’re implying, Mr. Science, Biden voters are smarter?
What has Biden delivered?
Mandatory vaccination for essential workers, i.e., law enforcement, highly trained healthcare workers, public school teachers . . .
Open southern border with record numbers of people from around the world allowed entry without vetting, testing, etc. vaccination optional. 20% with “health issues” according to the Head of DHS.
Trump got the vaccine available in record time, took it, and recommends it. Trump isn’t a factor.
The analysis isn't saying Trump is the factor.
It is saying Trump voters are the factor.
Trump is smart enough to get vaccinated.
The same isn't true for a large % of his voting base.
The largest per capita group of unvaxxed is back and brown folks.
Post the source and we can dig in to it.
Crystal and Saagar. Breaking Points podcast. #1 news/politics podcast in the cuntry.
Anything in writing? I doubt those guys wrote any analysis but are quoting data and a study. Who did the study?
I listen to them regularly. They've made the poont on numerous occasions. They are very good at citing their sources, and handicapping the validity of a source, however I don't take notes.
Most recently (I think the Nicki Minaj clip) that in NYC only 33% of AA are vaxxed. I'm sure the "Vaccine Numbers", "Class Divide", "Vaccination Uptick" vids will discuss.
Crystal and Saagar are also both pro-vaxx.
Chronological order newest to oldest. Knock yourself out.
Trump got the vaccine available in record time, took it, and recommends it. Trump isn’t a factor.
The analysis isn't saying Trump is the factor.
It is saying Trump voters are the factor.
Trump is smart enough to get vaccinated.
The same isn't true for a large % of his voting base.
Or more Democrats are of the youthful
First doubting response that actually makes a valid point about whetther or not this analysis controlled for age. I've always suspected that not all Trump fans were dumbshits.
That said, I'd be surprised if age by itself was the main issue here -- I'd bet $100 that it is mainly due to vaccination rates.
4 x higher death rate is significant.
Seems significant on the surface and framing, really isn’t when you are talking tiny numbers. Smart people avoid the % increase talking points on tiny baselines.
I see that math and science aren't your strong points.
Recently laughed a sales guy out of the room that touted that 25% growth on a $50k customer was a huge success when he didn’t spend much time talking about the customer that grew 5% on a $2m base and had a 15% growth target.
I’m a contribution dollar guy but maybe that’s just me.
Which means nothing in reference to biostats.
47 / 100000 compared to 10 / 1000000 is stastically significant in science.
Sales guys might use numbers but there is a reason you're in sales and not in the sciences.
Trump got the vaccine available in record time, took it, and recommends it. Trump isn’t a factor.
The analysis isn't saying Trump is the factor.
It is saying Trump voters are the factor.
Trump is smart enough to get vaccinated.
The same isn't true for a large % of his voting base.
Or more Democrats are of the youthful
First doubting response that actually makes a valid point about whetther or not this analysis controlled for age. I've always suspected that not all Trump fans were dumbshits.
That said, I'd be surprised if age by itself was the main issue here -- I'd bet $100 that it is mainly due to vaccination rates.
4 x higher death rate is significant.
Seems significant on the surface and framing, really isn’t when you are talking tiny numbers. Smart people avoid the % increase talking points on tiny baselines.
I see that math and science aren't your strong points.
Recently laughed a sales guy out of the room that touted that 25% growth on a $50k customer was a huge success when he didn’t spend much time talking about the customer that grew 5% on a $2m base and had a 15% growth target.
I’m a contribution dollar guy but maybe that’s just me.
Which means nothing in reference to biostats.
47 / 100000 compared to 10 / 1000000 is stastically significant in science.
Sales guys might use numbers but there is a reason you're in sales and not in the sciences.
Lol at your claim of what is statistically significant.
Says the sales person...
Be sure to upsell those folks at your drive up window the super size.
Trump got the vaccine available in record time, took it, and recommends it. Trump isn’t a factor.
The analysis isn't saying Trump is the factor.
It is saying Trump voters are the factor.
Trump is smart enough to get vaccinated.
The same isn't true for a large % of his voting base.
Or more Democrats are of the youthful
First doubting response that actually makes a valid point about whetther or not this analysis controlled for age. I've always suspected that not all Trump fans were dumbshits.
That said, I'd be surprised if age by itself was the main issue here -- I'd bet $100 that it is mainly due to vaccination rates.
4 x higher death rate is significant.
Seems significant on the surface and framing, really isn’t when you are talking tiny numbers. Smart people avoid the % increase talking points on tiny baselines.
I see that math and science aren't your strong points.
Recently laughed a sales guy out of the room that touted that 25% growth on a $50k customer was a huge success when he didn’t spend much time talking about the customer that grew 5% on a $2m base and had a 15% growth target.
I’m a contribution dollar guy but maybe that’s just me.
Which means nothing in reference to biostats.
47 / 100000 compared to 10 / 1000000 is stastically significant in science.
Sales guys might use numbers but there is a reason you're in sales and not in the sciences.
Did someone really post this and think it makes them sound smart?
Trump got the vaccine available in record time, took it, and recommends it. Trump isn’t a factor.
The analysis isn't saying Trump is the factor.
It is saying Trump voters are the factor.
Trump is smart enough to get vaccinated.
The same isn't true for a large % of his voting base.
Or more Democrats are of the youthful
First doubting response that actually makes a valid point about whetther or not this analysis controlled for age. I've always suspected that not all Trump fans were dumbshits.
That said, I'd be surprised if age by itself was the main issue here -- I'd bet $100 that it is mainly due to vaccination rates.
4 x higher death rate is significant.
Seems significant on the surface and framing, really isn’t when you are talking tiny numbers. Smart people avoid the % increase talking points on tiny baselines.
I see that math and science aren't your strong points.
Recently laughed a sales guy out of the room that touted that 25% growth on a $50k customer was a huge success when he didn’t spend much time talking about the customer that grew 5% on a $2m base and had a 15% growth target.
I’m a contribution dollar guy but maybe that’s just me.
Which means nothing in reference to biostats.
47 / 100000 compared to 10 / 1000000 is stastically significant in science.
Sales guys might use numbers but there is a reason you're in sales and not in the sciences.
Did someone really post this and think it makes them sound smart?
Had some big belly laughs on this one last night. For multiple reasons.
In June 2020. Biden and every left mouth piece said, so what if we get vaccines. Is anyone gonna take them?
It was the Trump vaccine then.
And in 2 months when many people start to realize that they aren’t effective at stopping covid, they will be Trumps vaccine again.
And the resident ball washers won’t say a word.
He said we needed to have experts across the country review Trump's vaccine before it should be rolled out nationwide. Then all of the dipshits here voted for Joey and his words went out the window.
If you voted for Joey, you're not only stupid and gullible, you're a colossal loser. Them's the facts BidenBros.
"This Is A Game-Changer" - Merck Releasing "Phenomenal" Test Results For Experimental COVID Pill
BY TYLER DURDEN FRIDAY, OCT 01, 2021 - 07:45 AM Looks like Merck just beat Pfizer to the punch.
Merck announced Friday that an experimental COVID pill it has developed reduced hospitalizations and deaths by 50% in people recently infected with COVID.
The company will soon ask health officials in the US and abroad to authorize use of the drug.
The news came as a welcome surprise to the public, although COVID cases are already waning in the US and in hard-hit economies in Asia, the drug could create "a real therapeutic advance" that could dramatically decrease the risk of death from COVID.
If approved (and odds are it will be) the drug would be the first treatment for COVID. Some compared it to tamiflu, in that patients should take it within 5 days of COVID infection (like those infected with the flu are instructed to take tamiflu early).
Former FDA Director Dr. Scott Gottlieb told CNBC that the trial results are clearly "profoundly" positive, even though researchers decided to stop the trial early because the drug showed significant success, meaning it would be unethical to keep giving patients placebos. To test the drug, they needed to test more than 700 unvaccinated people in a global study. The people were all considered in the "high risk" category due to factors like age, and other characteristics from their "health profile".
Per the results, 7% of volunteers in the group that received the drug were hospitalized, and none of them died, compared with a 14% rate of hospitalization and death (include eight who died) in the placebo group.
According to Dr. Gottlieb, "this is a phenomenal result. This is a profound game-changer that we have an oral pill that had this kind of effect on patients who are already symptomatic."
Dr. Gottlieb also pointed out that the team that developed the drug "also invented the first successful antibody against ebola so this is a very good drug-development team."
"And remember we have two other drugs in development one by Pfizer (where Dr. Gottlieb serves on the board) and the other by Roches," he said.
Patients won't be taking the drug for very long, typically around five days, which means "the safety profile is probably pretty good," Dr. Gottlieb said.
Comments
Maybe you are better looking than @hhusky though.
Be sure to upsell those folks at your drive up window the super size.
Obesity/Type 2 diabetes rates : Southern states vs. rest of country?
Just a thought . . .
What has Biden delivered?
Mandatory vaccination for essential workers, i.e., law enforcement, highly trained healthcare workers, public school teachers . . .
Open southern border with record numbers of people from around the world allowed entry without vetting, testing, etc. vaccination optional. 20% with “health issues” according to the Head of DHS.
Most recently (I think the Nicki Minaj clip) that in NYC only 33% of AA are vaxxed. I'm sure the "Vaccine Numbers", "Class Divide", "Vaccination Uptick" vids will discuss.
Crystal and Saagar are also both pro-vaxx.
Chronological order newest to oldest. Knock yourself out.
It was the Trump vaccine then.
And in 2 months when many people start to realize that they aren’t effective at stopping covid, they will be Trumps vaccine again.
And the resident ball washers won’t say a word.
NEW AND IMPROVED!!!
If you voted for Joey, you're not only stupid and gullible, you're a colossal loser. Them's the facts BidenBros.
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/game-changer-merck-releasing-phenomenal-test-results-experimental-covid-pill
"This Is A Game-Changer" - Merck Releasing "Phenomenal" Test Results For Experimental COVID Pill
BY TYLER DURDEN
FRIDAY, OCT 01, 2021 - 07:45 AM
Looks like Merck just beat Pfizer to the punch.
Merck announced Friday that an experimental COVID pill it has developed reduced hospitalizations and deaths by 50% in people recently infected with COVID.
The company will soon ask health officials in the US and abroad to authorize use of the drug.
The news came as a welcome surprise to the public, although COVID cases are already waning in the US and in hard-hit economies in Asia, the drug could create "a real therapeutic advance" that could dramatically decrease the risk of death from COVID.
If approved (and odds are it will be) the drug would be the first treatment for COVID. Some compared it to tamiflu, in that patients should take it within 5 days of COVID infection (like those infected with the flu are instructed to take tamiflu early).
Former FDA Director Dr. Scott Gottlieb told CNBC that the trial results are clearly "profoundly" positive, even though researchers decided to stop the trial early because the drug showed significant success, meaning it would be unethical to keep giving patients placebos. To test the drug, they needed to test more than 700 unvaccinated people in a global study. The people were all considered in the "high risk" category due to factors like age, and other characteristics from their "health profile".
Per the results, 7% of volunteers in the group that received the drug were hospitalized, and none of them died, compared with a 14% rate of hospitalization and death (include eight who died) in the placebo group.
According to Dr. Gottlieb, "this is a phenomenal result. This is a profound game-changer that we have an oral pill that had this kind of effect on patients who are already symptomatic."
Dr. Gottlieb also pointed out that the team that developed the drug "also invented the first successful antibody against ebola so this is a very good drug-development team."
"And remember we have two other drugs in development one by Pfizer (where Dr. Gottlieb serves on the board) and the other by Roches," he said.
Patients won't be taking the drug for very long, typically around five days, which means "the safety profile is probably pretty good," Dr. Gottlieb said.