11 thoughts on “Unvaxxed are testing positive for Covid-19 at the lowest rate, Triple Vaxxed at the highest”
Possible explanation for this data. . .the same people who dragged themselves in thrice for a shot they did not need are also the ones going to Walgreens for a test everytime they get the sniffles or somebody sneezes near them in the store. Those who take shots take tests. Those who don’t don’t.
That was my understanding, that the totally discredited PCR test can register positive not only for regular colds, but also for months-ago COVID. And who knows how it registers all those spike proteins generated by the shot? The recent Pfizer dump confirmed that the internal data showed a 12percent efficacy, so the Walgreens data is no surprise, but I wonder why we are still trusting PCR tests?
The real headline here is, the multi-vaxxed get infected like everybody.
But one shouldn’t make much of the numbers beyond that. Because it’s what you call “unscientific polling,” biases not filtered out. I mean, who gets tested at Walgreens? More likely – not always, but more likely – to be people who are symptomatic and fearful. At least some would, in the moment, feel an emotional pressure to “upgrade” their vaxx status i.e. lie about it.
Oh, good point. Some lesser-vaxxed folks might handle the pro-vaxx social pressure, not by lying and not by being forthcoming either, but by opting out of the question.
If the shot isn’t working as it’s supposed to, or as it’s been advertised, that leaves a few possibilities:
1. It just doesn’t work.
2. It does work, but not as well, and it’s effectiveness goes down over time.
3. It works perfectly, but only in select batches, and on select people.
4. It is working just fine… The people who took it are just too stupid to realize that the government who lied about everything up to this point, would lie about this specific injection, and what it’s supposed to do, whatever nefarious reason that could be.
Who are these unvaxed getting tested? I don’t know any who would unless it was forced on them after hospitalization, myself included. If I got a cold or flu tomorrow I would probably assume it was covid but never get tested.
That was my understanding, that the totally discredited PCR test can register positive not only for regular colds, but also for months-ago COVID. And who knows how it registers all those spike proteins generated by the shot? The recent Pfizer dump confirmed that the internal data showed a 12percent efficacy, so the Walgreens data is no surprise, but I wonder why we are still trusting PCR tests?
At sufficient cycles, even the test maker said “you can find anything”. It was my understanding that if you answered you were vaccinated your test was cycled at a lower rate (avoiding false positives) and if you were not vaccinated your test was cycled at a higher rate (assuring you would be positive). I have no idea if they are still doing that, but it renders a bad test even worse at identifying “positivity”. Above I think 35 cycles and all bets are off. I don’t understand why PCR tests are still being used, they were discredited long ago. Are people totally incapable of learning things and making rational decisions? What am I saying.
I’m continuing to watch my provincial numbers. People in their 30s with no co-morbidities are being hospitalized for covid here. Hundreds of them. This did not happen last year. Our hospitalization numbers are higher now than when they closed schools this time last year for two weeks. They said it was to reduce pressure on the hospitals, but it was to compel people to get the shots. I still can’t travel.
Possible explanation for this data. . .the same people who dragged themselves in thrice for a shot they did not need are also the ones going to Walgreens for a test everytime they get the sniffles or somebody sneezes near them in the store. Those who take shots take tests. Those who don’t don’t.
I’m not sure. A larger sample size shouldn’t impact the percentages as a rule, unless the sniffles are throwing false positives?
That was my understanding, that the totally discredited PCR test can register positive not only for regular colds, but also for months-ago COVID. And who knows how it registers all those spike proteins generated by the shot? The recent Pfizer dump confirmed that the internal data showed a 12percent efficacy, so the Walgreens data is no surprise, but I wonder why we are still trusting PCR tests?
The real headline here is, the multi-vaxxed get infected like everybody.
But one shouldn’t make much of the numbers beyond that. Because it’s what you call “unscientific polling,” biases not filtered out. I mean, who gets tested at Walgreens? More likely – not always, but more likely – to be people who are symptomatic and fearful. At least some would, in the moment, feel an emotional pressure to “upgrade” their vaxx status i.e. lie about it.
I’ve been tested at Walgreens. So I can tell you that you can opt out from answering the vaxx question. I’d like to know what that number is.
Oh, good point. Some lesser-vaxxed folks might handle the pro-vaxx social pressure, not by lying and not by being forthcoming either, but by opting out of the question.
If the shot isn’t working as it’s supposed to, or as it’s been advertised, that leaves a few possibilities:
1. It just doesn’t work.
2. It does work, but not as well, and it’s effectiveness goes down over time.
3. It works perfectly, but only in select batches, and on select people.
4. It is working just fine… The people who took it are just too stupid to realize that the government who lied about everything up to this point, would lie about this specific injection, and what it’s supposed to do, whatever nefarious reason that could be.
Who are these unvaxed getting tested? I don’t know any who would unless it was forced on them after hospitalization, myself included. If I got a cold or flu tomorrow I would probably assume it was covid but never get tested.
That was my understanding, that the totally discredited PCR test can register positive not only for regular colds, but also for months-ago COVID. And who knows how it registers all those spike proteins generated by the shot? The recent Pfizer dump confirmed that the internal data showed a 12percent efficacy, so the Walgreens data is no surprise, but I wonder why we are still trusting PCR tests?
At sufficient cycles, even the test maker said “you can find anything”. It was my understanding that if you answered you were vaccinated your test was cycled at a lower rate (avoiding false positives) and if you were not vaccinated your test was cycled at a higher rate (assuring you would be positive). I have no idea if they are still doing that, but it renders a bad test even worse at identifying “positivity”. Above I think 35 cycles and all bets are off. I don’t understand why PCR tests are still being used, they were discredited long ago. Are people totally incapable of learning things and making rational decisions? What am I saying.
I’m continuing to watch my provincial numbers. People in their 30s with no co-morbidities are being hospitalized for covid here. Hundreds of them. This did not happen last year. Our hospitalization numbers are higher now than when they closed schools this time last year for two weeks. They said it was to reduce pressure on the hospitals, but it was to compel people to get the shots. I still can’t travel.