you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ActuallyNot 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

I saw this headline on the anti-science site natural news. Sound naming convention: Bullshit is natural.

Anyway, so I clicked through to the paper, and read the abstract.

It says in part:

Viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020.

Fully vaccinated people do fucking not carry 251 times the viral load. It's people infected with the delta variant that have 251 times the viral load.

[–]StillLessons 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Your own quote doesn't clearly make your point.

"breakthrough Delta variant infection".

Breakthrough cases are defined as cases in fully vaccinated people. Named as such because the virus has "broken through" the protection offered by the vaccine. You are focusing on the fact that these occurred in the presence of the delta variant, which does introduce another variable here - yes, we are talking about a mutated virus - but the word breakthrough does indeed mean that these cases were in fully vaccinated people.

[–]pizda 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Yes, but if someone is infected without being vaccinated, they are just that - still having 251 more viral load.

[–]StillLessons 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

The quote he cites from the abstract of the study is quite specific. It is talking about viral loads of breakthrough cases. Not of non-breakthrough cases.

[–]pizda 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

And that's what they're willingly omitting.

[–]FlippyKing 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Are you accusing the study's authors of data manipulation? Are you saying they studied and got useful data from unjabbed people but are withholding that data and thus presenting not the results the study got but instead results they wanted? If so, can you back that accusation, or what ever accusation you are making, up?

[–]pizda 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

My accusation is: The OP has willingly omitted the details of the study, the title is implying everyone who is vaxxed carries higher viral load, which is not what the study is about.

[–]FlippyKing 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I mix up "names" here on SaidIt, are you also the guy who ignored the meaning of "Breakthrough" and how the term only applies to the vaccinated? If so, then: that.

There are reasons why breakthroughs happen, and one of them (a major one if not THE major one) is when the drug (they are still drugs, that's the right term) injected has a problem that will either be due to a problem with the entire batch or due to inconsistencies within the batch, and no I will not get more specific. Go read up on it yourself.

There are also reasons why higher viral loads might be something to not take at face value and assume it is a worst possible scenario. Simple fact of the matter is that as viruses mutate they tend towards less deadly. This is true of all virus but not true of every mutation especially early on. But, a virus that kills its host does not spread as freely as one that does not, so less deadly ones have a more "fit" adaptation for their propagation. Why they have high, and it is entirely possible they have higher, viral loads (and how this is measured accurately is important because it is not always accurate at all) may well be due to the same reason each season's flu vax leaves you more suspectible to the following year's flu.

There are scientists who think vaccines against viruses that mutate quickly and that have an animal reservoir is impossible, and some who think most viruses are always going to fool the vaccines by mutating faster than they can be made. It is analogous to the ever rising costs of pesticides and herbicides and the ever rising amount of crop losses that occurred (at least up until very recently as I've not looked at that data in a few years). These are very profitable strategies for businesses but not for people.

[–]Node 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

are you also the guy who ignored the meaning of "Breakthrough" and how the term only applies to the vaccinated?

No, that was this guy:

https://saidit.net/s/news/comments/8b5x/study_shows_fully_vaccinated_people_carry_251/uubd?context=3

[–]FlippyKing 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Thanks! I mix everyone up here. That comment was deleted. I'm assuming they figured out he was off base? That an improvement. They pyramid might actually work.