Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: rbowman Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: Submarines Date: 12 Sep 2025 03:48:11 GMT Lines: 93 Message-ID: References: <106mke5$1di32$1@dont-email.me> <6jefmlxb6j.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <10884l7$173em$1@dont-email.me> <1088lbg$1agt7$1@dont-email.me> <9aadne5uMN4JgTX1nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com> <108am3a$1pga7$6@dont-email.me> <108c5on$234t5$16@dont-email.me> <109mlpa$aju3$1@dont-email.me> <109ouee$t9ek$5@dont-email.me> <4s5wQ.117826$j831.5003@fx40.iad> <109rea9$1ilji$9@dont-email.me> <109rjap$1jq5i$1@dont-email.me> <109rn8g$1lrdl$1@dont-email.me> <109u5uf$2ga9g$2@dont-email.me> <109v1ir$2q0sg$2@dont-email.me> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net TL6n4M4tx9kkebU6J86sYww1eI2j7EBmbYd3VvRZlmoThsC12G Cancel-Lock: sha1:/w8gd8hzUYUoB3rID9NurX3cBc8= sha256:Dd3B9jHwFm+MbkEczTGS2J0f0ya2GYLykIeXYroIRXw= User-Agent: Pan/0.162 (Pokrosvk) Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:73915 On Thu, 11 Sep 2025 18:40:43 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 11/09/2025 18:32, rbowman wrote: >> On Thu, 11 Sep 2025 10:49:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> >>> On 10/09/2025 20:39, rbowman wrote: >>>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2025 12:26:08 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>> >>>>> Which reminds me. I have to book my annual flu jab... >>>> >>>> The one that is 50% effective on really good years? >>> >>> What does 50% effective mean? that I don't get an infection serious >>> enough to kill me. >>> I'll take that >> >> https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines/keyfacts.html >> >> "In general, flu vaccines work best among healthy younger adults and >> older children." >> > Isn't CDC something that Trump has identified as retrograde woke and > needing to be shut down? It has exceeded its original mandate and needs to have its wings clipped. > > >> Are you a healthy younger adult? >> >> The way efficacy statistics are compiled is interesting. First, it is a >> self-selected population, those who present at a health care provider >> and are determined to have an influenza strain. At that point I'm not >> sure exactly what 30% efficacy means. >> > Not outside the USA. So how do they determine the efficacy outside of the US? As I read it the meaning is 70% of the people presenting with a verified influenza infection had received the shot. What percentage of the total population does that represent? https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/influenza-vaccines/last-years-flu-vaccine-41- effective-preventing-medically-attended-influenza-data They are a bit vague but the money shot is "Notably, VE against illnesses caused by H1N1 varied significantly by age. Among children 8 months to 8 years, VE was 58%, but the vaccine offered no protection for adults ages 50 to 64 years." https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5853256/ Then there is a bit of a paradox: "In one year of the study, it appeared that multiply vaccinated subjects were actually more likely to develop influenza than unvaccinated subjects (that is, VE was statistically significantly less than zero)." https://www.science.org/content/article/why-flu-vaccines-so-often-fail A less technical account. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canada-flu-shot-vaccine-skowronski- h1n1-1.3669427 "Experts used to believe the annual flu shot protection was much higher, around 70 to 90 per cent. But not anymore. Those early estimates were based on industry-funded clinical trials that were extrapolated to apply across all ages and flu seasons." I am shocked! Shocked! Industry funded test showed the stuff the industry was pushing is a Great Thing. Follow The Science, not The Propaganda. At least in the US the colorful banners are being rolled out 'Get Your Free Flu Shot'. There is no such fucking thing as a 'free' flu shot. Pfizer and the rest of the pharma vultures are not charity organizations. It's isn't dramatic enough to have gotten much exposure but RFK jr. and Trump are also trying to eliminate pharma advertising on TV. I'll really miss those ads telling me to talk to my doctor about some miracle drug to cure a condition I've never heard of. As a side effect, since all ads must have at least 50% POCs, I've concluded POCs are a sickly lot. >> Anyway, your body, your choice. > > Would you say that if I was a pregnant teenage girl? As a matter of fact, yes. Actually, like Margaret Sanger in her prime, I would encourage it if you were a pregnant POC and throw in a tubal ligation absolutely free.