|
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control.
It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you.
Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly.
This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here.
Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. |
On June 19 2021 20:24 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:99% of hospitalisations being unvaccinated sounds way too high, got any source for that or it’s just an anecdote? For comparison - Recent UK data for the delta strain is around 70% of admissions being unvaccinated, little under two thirds of visits requiring at least overnight stay being unvaccinated and a little over half of deaths being unvaccinated (small sample for deaths) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/11/delta-variant-is-linked-to-90-of-covid-cases-in-uk
99% seems to be right; at least, in certain parts of the world. Why do you think that's too high? A lot of people who are skeptical about the efficacy of the vaccines only think about the first line of defense - that you're maybe only 95% or 90% or 80% protected from getting coronavirus if you're vaccinated - but forget about the second line of defense: that even if you do get coronavirus, the vaccine will almost perfectly ensure that you don't get seriously ill / extreme side effects / die. Those two points, combined with the fact that being vaccinated additionally lowers the chance that a covid-positive person transmits it to someone else, make these vaccines incredibly helpful.
"“From January first to around mid-April, we’ve had around 4,300 admissions to the hospital with COVID. Of those patients, 99% were not fully vaccinated,” said Eduardo Mireles, MD, Director of the Medical Intensive Care Unit.
In addition to showing the majority of COVID-19 hospital admissions were in people who had not received a full vaccine series, another set of data looking at hospital employees shows a similar trend.
Researchers looked at nearly 2,000 hospital workers who had contracted COVID-19. They studied infections in the four months after the vaccine was offered. Results show 99.7% of infections in this group occurred among those who were unvaccinated."
https://newsroom.clevelandclinic.org/2021/05/12/most-covid-19-infections-and-hospitalizations-are-in-unvaccinated/
"Study: 99.75% of hospitalized COVID-19 patients weren't vaccinated
The Cleveland Clinic on Tuesday released a study showing that 99.75% of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between Jan. 1 and April 13 were not fully vaccinated, according to data provided to Axios."
https://news.yahoo.com/cleveland-clinic-study-over-99-165631981.html
"In Minnesota, the HealthPartners system has seen a “precipitous decline” in COVID-19 hospitalizations, says Dr. Mark Sannes, an infectious disease physician and senior medical director for the system, which operates nine hospitals and more than 55 clinics. But now, nearly every admitted patient he does see is unvaccinated.
“Less than 1% of our hospitalized COVID patients are vaccinated," he said."
https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att/cm/people-hospitalized-covid-19-now-100140919.html
|
|
|
|
|
Your personal liberty stops when mine starts. It's an easy way to resolve that moral issue.
Anyway, got vaccinated today, next shot is in 4weeks. hypu
|
COVID only exists politically on media screens and proliferates by word of mouth (from a single political entity). So good luck with substantial comments that are bipartisan (freethinking).
|
On June 19 2021 22:25 Erasme wrote:
Your personal liberty stops when mine starts. It's an easy way to resolve that moral issue.
It really is not. You could argue either way from this principle.
On June 20 2021 01:13 rel wrote:
COVID only exists politically on media screens and proliferates by word of mouth (from a single political entity). So good luck with substantial comments that are bipartisan (freethinking).
???
|
I would elaborate, but probably said too much already. The corpo-global liberals who moderate this site don't take too much to opposing criticism. Which is why you see much of the echo-chamber and the like-minded of the opposed get ousted quite vehemently.
|
On June 20 2021 04:29 rel wrote:
I would elaborate, but probably said too much already. The corpo-global liberals who moderate this site don't take too much to opposing criticism. Which is why you see much of the echo-chamber and the like-minded of the opposed get ousted quite vehemently.
Is this satire?
|
I am the 180 degrees version of JimmiC.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On June 20 2021 02:30 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2021 22:25 Erasme wrote:
Your personal liberty stops when mine starts. It's an easy way to resolve that moral issue. It really is not. You could argue either way from this principle.
It actually is really easy to resolve this moral issue. The statistics that JimmiC offered shows that if you're a vaccinated adult COVID poses virtually no threat to you. It poses some super small threat but certainly not enough to support mandatory vaccines, vaccine passports, mask mandates, etc.
|
One of the more obvious ways you can tell that many people obsessed with COVID care more about virtue signaling than about the science of protecting people is to go out in public and see what % of masks are cloth masks. Almost all of my personal friends and the vast majority of strangers I see in public wear cloth masks. I don't wear cloth masks. I exclusively wear those baby-blue hospital masks. The reason is that research shows they are more effective at stopping respiratory particles. Maybe at the start of the pandemic they were hard to come by but now they are easily available. If people really cared about protecting people everyone would be wearing these masks but instead only a small % of people do.
|
|
|
...do... do you even read what you are writing?
if you're a vaccinated adult COVID poses virtually no threat to you. certainly not enough to support mandatory vaccines, vaccine passports, mask mandates, etc.
You are literally saying:
If X, then Y is safe
Therefore Y is safe
Therefore not X
Like, your third grade teacher would fail you on your logic here.
Also, the only thing in that list that is actually being proposed is the vaccine passport. Mask mandates are being lifted as coverage rises, and very few western countries can seriously consider mandatory vaccines.
Idk dude good luck out there.
|
On June 19 2021 20:43 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:99% seems to be right; at least, in certain parts of the world. Why do you think that's too high?
Because the data that I linked in my post from the UK shows it’s around 70% of those hospitalised are unvaccinated, not 99%.Some of that may be due to the Pfizer being more effective than AZ and the UK data being new variant but it’s a pretty big gap.
|
On June 20 2021 06:15 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2021 02:30 maybenexttime wrote:On June 19 2021 22:25 Erasme wrote:
Your personal liberty stops when mine starts. It's an easy way to resolve that moral issue. It really is not. You could argue either way from this principle. It actually is really easy to resolve this moral issue. The statistics that JimmiC offered shows that if you're a vaccinated adult COVID poses virtually no threat to you. It poses some super small threat but certainly not enough to support mandatory vaccines, vaccine passports, mask mandates, etc.
First of all, there are people who cannot be vaccinated for objective reasons or for whom vaccines are ineffective. Secondly, if enough people remain unvaccinated, this poses the risk of further outbreaks, leading to either more lockdowns or collapse of the healthcare system a la Bergamo, New York or India. Those affect vaccinated people as well.
|
|
|
On June 20 2021 07:10 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2021 20:43 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 19 2021 20:24 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:99% of hospitalisations being unvaccinated sounds way too high, got any source for that or it’s just an anecdote? For comparison - Recent UK data for the delta strain is around 70% of admissions being unvaccinated, little under two thirds of visits requiring at least overnight stay being unvaccinated and a little over half of deaths being unvaccinated (small sample for deaths) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/11/delta-variant-is-linked-to-90-of-covid-cases-in-uk 99% seems to be right; at least, in certain parts of the world. Why do you think that's too high? Because the data that I linked in my post from the UK shows it’s around 70% of those hospitalised are unvaccinated, not 99%.Some of that may be due to the Pfizer being more effective than AZ and the UK data being new variant but it’s a pretty big gap.
You two are comparing data for all of covid vs data for the one variant (the 70% number)
|
On June 20 2021 06:48 Belisarius wrote:...do... do you even read what you are writing? Show nested quote +certainly not enough to support mandatory vaccines, vaccine passports, mask mandates, etc. You are literally saying: If X, then Y is safe Therefore Y is safe Therefore not X Like, your third grade teacher would fail you on your logic here. Also, the only thing in that list that is actually being proposed is the vaccine passport. Mask mandates are being lifted as coverage rises, and very few western countries can seriously consider mandatory vaccines. Idk dude good luck out there.
You are taking my words out of context. We are discussing the moral issue of which is a more important personal liberty to preserve - the right to refuse vaccines/masks/social distance protocols or the personal liberty to not be killed by someone that chooses not to vaccinate/mask/social distance.
My argument is that, based on JimmiC's numbers, if you are vaccinated COVID poses very little threat to you and if COVID poses very little threat to you then you shouldn't have the right to compel people to do anything to protect your personal liberty of not being infected.
There's nothing contradictory or illogical there, my friend.
|
|
|
On June 20 2021 07:13 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2021 06:15 BlackJack wrote:On June 20 2021 02:30 maybenexttime wrote:On June 19 2021 22:25 Erasme wrote:
Your personal liberty stops when mine starts. It's an easy way to resolve that moral issue. It really is not. You could argue either way from this principle. It actually is really easy to resolve this moral issue. The statistics that JimmiC offered shows that if you're a vaccinated adult COVID poses virtually no threat to you. It poses some super small threat but certainly not enough to support mandatory vaccines, vaccine passports, mask mandates, etc. First of all, there are people who cannot be vaccinated for objective reasons or for whom vaccines are ineffective. Secondly, if enough people remain unvaccinated, this poses the risk of further outbreaks, leading to either more lockdowns or collapse of the healthcare system a la Bergamo, New York or India. Those affect vaccinated people as well.
Both valid points that I considered before I made my argument. Surely some X number of lives can be saved of people that can't take the vaccine and have no choice in the matter. I just think X is not a big enough number to tilt the scales in this case. Just like we could save some X number of lives every flu season yet we do absolutely nothing.
For your 2nd point I think you would have to show some evidence that a healthcare system collapse is possible without government mandated interventions. Texas has been fully reopened for a bit now and they still haven't descended into chaos.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
