The Amateur Message Boards of the World Famous VoyeurWeb

Per the NY TImes:

"Vaccines, Masks, Staying At Home Did Not Make A Major Difference In COVID Case Rates, NYT Says"

johnforbes has been slithering around his social media gossip sites again, I see. Apparently, being illiterate, johnforbes couldn't read the guy's article for himself. Instead he passed on the lies he got off his usual partisan gossip sites.

Here's the article johnny failed to read for himself: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/09/brie ... tates.html

Go down to the "Vaccines, above all" section.

"The first lesson is that Covid vaccines are remarkably effective at preventing severe illness. Here are the same four states from the above charts, this time with death rates instead of case rates: [graphs in article]

"The messiness of the previous charts has given way to an obvious pattern: Covid death has been far more common in red America. Over the past three months, the death rate in counties that Donald Trump won in a landslide has been more than twice as high as the rate in counties that Joe Biden won in a landslide, according to Charles Gaba, a health care analyst."-NYT


So gullible johnny is again caught in another partisan lie when he said "Masks, Vaccines, Remaining at Home Made no Difference." Of course vaccines made a huge difference. All the science proves they did. johnforbes just doesn't consider death rates to be a meaningful measure of a "difference". "More people died? So what. It makes "no difference.""-johnfoibles

Obviously, the tens of thousands of deaths of Americans due to Republican policies is not a significant factor for either Republicans or johnforbes.

What does "Red America" even mean?

There are no "red" or "blue" states and only Tim Russert was simpistic enough to come up with that baloney. Every state is a mix.

The NY Times is a nutty leftist rag, but did note that masks, vaccines, and lockdowns did little if any good.

Follow the science,

"The NY Times is a nutty leftist rag, but did note that masks, vaccines, and lockdowns did little if any good."-johnfibs

johnny, I just proved to you that that is a lie by quoting the article you are lying about.

Why you persist in repeating that lie, however, is not beyond me, because you are a proven lying sack of shit.

If only you would follow the science for once instead of merely following dishonest Right Wing propaganda sites.

I do follow the science.

My starched white lab coat is on the hook every morning, and a beaker of Gevalia coffee is on the Bunsen burner as I arrive at the laboratory and commence my empirical episodes.

My green eyes, with impressive uncorrected visual acuity, focus with laser-like determination on not merely the ephemeral issues of the day but on "eternal verities."

johnny, you need to look up "eternal verites."

You seem to think it means "documented lies."

It doesn't.

Clowntoker appears to be faulknering around with the truth

johnflubs STILL hasn't provided any science to show that vaccines made no difference when they in fact made a huge difference.

This is why he is continuing to desperately distract from the facts I posted.

The science makes dimwit johnny look like an idiot. How could it not?

Science consistently exposes the truth, if only johnforbes would follow the science.

The tough questions remain.

If you implement any policy (e.g., lockdowns), a rational and serious person would examine costs and benefits.

Until April 2020, it was the position of Fauci and the S General and WHO that masks were NOT needed by healthy members of the general population, and then in April 2020 there started an almost religious mask fervor.

But Democrats from Pelosi to Gretchen Nitwhitmer to Obama to Newsom to Lightfoot to DeBlasio all violated their own mask mandates.

Dumb things like closing beaches were done.

Lockdowns did harm first, contravening Hippocrates.

johnflubs STILL hasn't provided any science to show that vaccines made no difference when they in fact made a huge difference.

He won't because he can't, of course. This is why he is continuing to desperately distract from the facts I posted.

If only he would follow the science for once in his useless, ignorant life.

The science makes dimwit johnny look like an idiot. That's the inherent nature of facts versus johnforbes.

We must point out that, yet again, Mr. Forbes has aimed his eagle eye at the real issue.

If you implement any policy (e.g., lockdowns), a rational and serious person would examine costs and benefits.

Until April 2020, it was the position of Fauci and the S General and WHO that masks were NOT needed by healthy members of the general population, and then in April 2020 there started an almost religious mask fervor.

But Democrats from Pelosi to Gretchen Nitwhitmer to Obama to Newsom to Lightfoot to DeBlasio all violated their own mask mandates.

Dumb things like closing beaches were done.

Lockdowns did harm first, contravening Hippocrates.

We must point out that, yet again, Mr. Forbes started this thread with an easily demonstrable lie and is now trying to distract from it because it makes him look like the imbecile he is.

His distraction is a desperate change of subject from his initial lie about vaccines to the small part of his big lie that can be argued (incorrectly and pointlessly) because he thinks generally healthy people always have the right to randomly kill others who made the grave and unforgivable mistake of becoming ill.

It's every man for himself in johnfibs 'compassionate' America.

Fuck 'em all...right, johnny?

^^^^^^ Another partisan tool who demands his' God-given right' to randomly kill one percent of the population and make another 50% of them sick?

sillydummy really needs to look up the word "hyperbole"

Clowntoker should look up the meaning of Hyper Troll

I did, dimwit, and your picture was next to the definition.

Ah, that explains why all the chicks on your staff have been emailing me for a date

No one on my staff is interested in liars who say things like "vaccines made no difference" when all evidence proves they did made a huge difference.

Your statement also proves you lied about "chicks" emailing you for dates.

It is well known that all my chickens email Morocco for their Medjool dates.

But I take johnny's point that young chickens are extremely attracted to "Barnyard johnforbes."

Maybe it's the smell?

I had not been informed that Clownslacker had chickens.

Certainly, like the rest of us, I was aware that he was chicken-chested and had chicken legs. Even that he did the "Chicken Dance."

As for the rest, even my own reading room -- the circular one at the British Museum -- had not equipped me with the remainder of that corpus of information.

It also didn't equip you with the current evidence of the great effectiveness of vaccines in curtailing the hospitalization and death rate of the COVID-19 virus.

Nor did it equip you to admit when you are wrong instead of merely teaching you to attempt to divert from the truth when it contradicts your partisan politics.

Thanks to Clown for admitting that he was poorly equipped to argue that point, or indeed any other.

It simply is not at all clear that masks, lockdowns, and the rest did any good whenn weighed (as they must be) against all the harm they did.

"It simply is not at all clear that masks, lockdowns, and the rest [vaccines] did any good whenn weighed (as they must be) against all the harm they did."-johnfibs

No, it is very clear that vaccines inarguably had a huge effect on mitigating the worst effects of COVID-19.

It is not even debated in any scientific or medical circles.

Clearly you are not equipped to follow the science even when it has been spoon fed to you.

Incidentally,I was obviously much better equipped to argue the point than you since, first, you didn't argue it at all, you simply made unsupported assertions, and second, I provided authoritative evidence that you are dead wrong on this point.

Evidence always trumps partisan hypocrisy and lies any day, dimwit.

The vaccines are 14 or 15 months out, depending on area, so no long-term info as to efficacy or safety is known.

The lockdowns did enormous harm first, thus contravening Hippocrates.

They caused bankruptcy, foreclosure, anxiety, depression divorce, spousal abuse, substance abuse, and two lost years of education.

If anybody thinks two lost years of education don't make a difference, just take a gander at any of Clowntoker's posts.

"The vaccines are 14 or 15 months out, depending on area, so no long-term info as to efficacy or safety is known."-johnfibs

And yet you claim repeatedly that vaccines "made no difference" when short term evidence is that they made a huge difference.

But if we are to believe this latest bit of idiotic flailing, in an effort to dig yourself out of an obvious hole of partisan stupidity, you just called yourself a liar because you started this thread making claims that you just now said no one can know yet are true. In other words, you just admitted you knowingly lied about vaccines.

Stop before you make an even bigger fool of yourself, dimwit.

It is simply the undeniable truth that vaccines have been out only 14 or 15 mos.

No long-term info re safety or efficacy is available given the short-term nature of vaccine use.

But the big negative health effects were caused by lockdowns, which already caused huge increases in heart disease, cancer, suicide, alcohol abuse, divorce, depression, etc.

"No long-term info re safety or efficacy is available given the short-term nature of vaccine use."-johnflubs

"Masks, Vaccines,...Made no Difference"-johnfibs

You just did it again, dimwit. You just admitted you lied when you started this thread since you claim it is too soon to know that vaccines "made no difference."

You really are oblivious of how often you stick your enormous feet into your own mouth, aren't you.

The only problem for you is that there is lots of evidence that vaccines made a huge difference for the better. I posted you several links to the scientific studies proving this fact. Then you then proceeded to ignore them because, being a troglodyte, you always refuse to follow the science.

So I proved you're a liar with science, and then you called yourself a liar.

Let's just all agree that you are a liar on this issue and forget about any more of your partisan bullshit concerning COVID, okay?

Well, yes, we have no crystal ball.

So far, all that can be said is that masks and vaccines and lockdowns didn't help as far as available data would suggest.

But what we do know is that lockdowns contravened the dictum of HIppocrates to "First do no harm."

Lockdowns were devastating, destroying jobs and businesses, creating isolation and depression, drug abuse and divorce.

If you look merely at the psychological junkyard which is Clowntoker's own personality, you see -- in mystic miniature -- the horrible consequences of lockdowns.

^^^^^^^^ There's another unsupported propaganda post from Dishonestjohn that we are now free to forget about since he admits he lies about this subject.

Who can recall every salient insight from Mr. Forbes? There are so many.

However, one stands out:

The tough questions remain.

If you implement any policy (e.g., lockdowns), a rational and serious person would examine costs and benefits.

Until April 2020, it was the position of Fauci and the S General and WHO that masks were NOT needed by healthy members of the general population, and then in April 2020 there started an almost religious mask fervor.

But Democrats from Pelosi to Gretchen Nitwhitmer to Obama to Newsom to Lightfoot to DeBlasio all violated their own mask mandates.

Dumb things like closing beaches were done.

Lockdowns did harm first, contravening Hippocrates.

^^^^^^^ You do realize that none of that partisan bullshit has anything to do with your admission of lying about vaccine efficacy, right?

But not to worry, johnny. I still ignored everything you just said because I don't take seriously people who admit they lie about this issue.

Science means awaiting longitudinal data and being willing to examine said data in a neutral manner.

If, in the coming years, it emerges that lockdowns and masks did some good, I'll stand at the head of the line to admit that.

As matters stand now, places which did not have lockdowns did equally well -- or better -- than the strict locations.

That's a fact, Jack.

"If, in the coming years, it emerges that lockdowns and masks did some good, I'll stand at the head of the line to admit that."-Dishonestjohn

But you still refuse to get to the head of the line saying you were wrong about vaccines not making a difference despite the fact that they have been documented as having made a huge difference for the better. So I guess we can ignore you saying you will be in the head of the line when it is shown you are wrong about masks and lockdowns.

This is now largely a pandemic of the unvaccinated. Vaccinated people seldom end up in the hospital or dead because of COVID.

Even though the stock market is in smoking ashes and Mr Forbes is again moving into his cardboard box down by the river, where he communicates with tin cans connected by binder twine, his staffers have sought his reaction.

He stands behind the celestial wisdom of his earlier posts, wherein he noted -- inter alia -- that vaccines have only been used 14 mos and their LONG-TERM efficacy and safety remains unknown.

Yes, dimwit, you can't have "LONG-TERM" information until a long term has passed. DUH....
No one has ever claimed "LONG_TERM" safety. But the huge number of lives they have saved makes them worth the low, low, low risk.

Meanwhile, the short term efficacy and safety of the vaccines has been well documented in scientific studies. (I linked to four of them for you, but you refused to read them)

Despite having this information, you still refuse to stand at the head of the line line to admit you were wrong.


"As matters stand now, places which did not have lockdowns did equally well -- or better -- than the strict locations."-johnfibs

This is another outright lie. I explained to you that Sweden (which had no lockdowns) had from four to ten times the COVID deaths per capita of Finland, Denmark, or New Zealand (which had varying degrees of lockdowns.)

Clearly the lockdowns worked. The numbers are well documented.

Dishonestjohnforbes, sadly, is just well demented.

You think if you just lie about them your lie will somehow become true. But it won't.

All sorts of science was NOT followed.

A huge quantity of people, over a billion, got early HCQ and had a 69 percent lower mortality, but that was ignored because Big Phama (and investors like me) wouldn't have made any money off HCQ.

As to vaccines and lockdowns, we will know the long-term safety and efficacy when time goes by and long-term info becomes available.

As of now, we have 14 mos of vaccine info and no serious person believes that is enough.

As to lockdowns, the costs have already started rolling in -- huge amounts of undiagnosed cancer and heart disease as people stayed home and skipped checkups to avoid covid, depression, drug abuse, divorce, bankruptcy, raging inflation because of trillions of money printed for covid stimulus needed BECAUSE lockdowns ruined business, etc.

"Yada, yada, yada, yada..."-johnforbes

Someone wake me up when he stops his partisan babbling. I've refuted all that nonsense many times.

So why does johnforbes refuse to stand at the head of the line to admit he was wrong about the efficacy of the COVID vaccines? He never answers that question. He just has more diversions.

As we journey toward the twilight of this fine thread, we now ask what we have learned here.

As is often the case, a posting above from Mr. Forbes summed it up best:

All sorts of science, sad to say, was NOT followed.

A huge quantity of people, over a billion, got early HCQ and had a 69 percent lower mortality, but that was ignored because Big Phama (and investors like me) wouldn't have made any money off HCQ.

As to vaccines and lockdowns, we will know the long-term safety and efficacy when time goes by and long-term info becomes available.

As of now, we have 14 mos of vaccine info and no serious person believes that is enough.

As to lockdowns, the costs have already started rolling in -- huge amounts of undiagnosed cancer and heart disease as people stayed home and skipped checkups to avoid covid, depression, drug abuse, divorce, bankruptcy, raging inflation because of trillions of money printed for covid stimulus needed BECAUSE lockdowns ruined business, etc.

"As of now, we have 14 mos of vaccine info and no serious person believes that is enough."-johnflubs

And yet you hypocritically believe it is enough to make the claim they "made no difference."-johnfibs

That's why no one respects your unmitigated partisan bullshit, johnny.

So far, that is what the evidence shows.

If further evidence shows something else, I will follow the science and adjust my ideation pursuant thereto.

Meanwhile, Democrats think men can get pregnant and they aspire to correct "misinformation"...

johnforbes wrote: ↑Sun Apr 24, 2022 4:08 pm
A huge quantity of people, over a billion, got early HCQ and had a 69 percent lower mortality, but that was ignored because Big Phama (and investors like me) wouldn't have made any money off HCQ.

As of now, we have 14 mos of vaccine info and no serious person believes that is enough.

So Johnnie is telling us that over a billion is a huge quantity.

And 14 months (10+ billion) is not enough?

Do you people even bother checking to get your bullshit straight?

Elkin, I am telling you a billion is a large quantity.

It is.

With HCQ, we now know -- at least for a few years -- that it won't help you if you have covid and get HCQ late.

But, with almost 2 billion people who got HCQ early, it resulted in about a 72 percent decline in mortality.

Do we have to wait for future years to unfold so we have more longitudinal data? Yes, that is how science works.

So there have been more than 10 BILLION dosages of vaccines which have been administered...and yet you claim that is not enough data?

Do you people even bother to think about the bullshit that you spew out?

Elkin, we all realize you are not a doctor.

Heck, Elkin is not even a high school graduate.

But, that issue aside, you don't gain long-term data in 14 months.

It takes time to gather than long-term data, and as of now there simply is no long-term data on vaccine efficacy/safety.

Now I personally figured I'd try to put the odds on my side by getting the shots, but there is now plenty of info relating to juvenile myocarditis which is disturbing.

Follow the science.

We will have long-term data when we have it.

So the feeble Forbes smashes down on the ad hominin button....again.

Are we surprised? Nope, because that is what intellectual lightweights do.

Regardless, there have been more than 10 BILLION dosages of the vaccines have been administered and long term side effects are extremely rare. Meaning that the benefits far out weigh the risks. Also, clinical trials for the COVID-19 vaccines started in the spring of 2020, so therefore there is more than two years (24 months) of data that is available. So before you start spewing out your bullshit, at least do some work to get your bullshit straight. Not to mention the fact that I hardly think you are qualified to claim that 14 months of data is not enough to determine long term safety and efficacy.

Ad hominem! But let's presume it was a typo.

Sure, 10 billion is a lot and we now have some idea of SHORT-TERM efficacy and safety.

What is lacking which science demands?

LONG-TERM safety and efficacy.

Thanks for the reminder !
Just got my second booster.

Good.

But it is the 72nd booster which will really do the trick.