|
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 July 04 2021 21:17 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2021 20:45 xM(Z wrote:On July 04 2021 15:07 Acrofales wrote:On July 04 2021 13:42 xM(Z wrote:
so everyone who died from covid was killed by someone else ... and that's the chinese? Without actually agreeing, let's say "yes" for the sake of argument. Why do you ask and where do you want to take this love of thought? well, it can't be yes because then you go into victimism. your argument is driven by a victims' mentality(personality trait) which defeats itself(you're unreceptive to evidence to the contrary). and it can't be no, because then, people who had covid and spread it around, didn't actually kill anyone(life happened) so you have with no argument to begin with; culpability goes out of the window. so you're left with this in-between shit, neither yes nor no, that needs to be negotiated between affected parties, reasonable adults, competent authorities ... etc; but you're incapable of negotiating life because no one taught you how to nor told you that you have to, in order to get along with ... other people. rejecting that conundrum, you fall back to your victim instincts and go with 'yes', then force the world to embrace/accept your take as the only reasonable one. now, if that's you, wouldn't people have objective reasons to ignore your take?; because after all, it comes from weakness. Aren't you a bit old to finally discover that not everything is black or white? I guess... better late than never? As to what you conclude afterwards, I don't really get. We can both attribute people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine, and take blame ourselves for not taking the virus seriously at the start of 2020 AND ALSO blame China for not doing their bit in stopping it from spreading and informing the world in time. None of those are mutually exclusive. 
"people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine" is just false, on two counts. there are cases in which refusing the vaccines is not negligent nor gets others sick.
that take of yours tells me that even if you entertain the existence of an in between, you're fully white here(as are 99% of people in this topic).
blaming something/someone is useless tryhard rhetoric; finding the cause for something though, should lead to practical consequences in dealing with the problem but for you, it doesn't. you'll forever be stuck with "people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine" mantra even when science shows that some people had preexisting immunity to covid before covid was a thing.+ Show Spoiler +As part of their work, the scientists used serum samples provided by people who did not have COVID-19. To their surprise, they found antibodies that reacted to SARS-CoV-2 in some of the samples. In their paper, the researchers describe a scientific theory that exposure to any of the common human coronaviruses, which can cause the common cold, may lead to immunity against the other common human coronaviruses. They refer to this as immune cross-reactivity .simmilar studies were made in Germany, Netherlands and Singapore. The scientists suspected that this immune “memory” was linked to those people having previously fought off the common cold. A study published Tuesday in the journal Science describes how researchers from the La Jolla Institute for Immunology sought to find evidence supporting this theory.
They examined blood samples taken from healthy subjects collected before the pandemic and examined the T cells in those samples. T cells or, white blood cells, are key parts of the body’s immune system, triggering the antibodies that work to destroy infected cells.
The researchers say T cells remember past infections for decades after a person has had a certain illness. In the samples they examined, they found evidence of T cells “trained” to fight off viruses associated with the common cold. They also were surprised to see that many of the T cells in the sample also recognized COVID-19 without having ever been directly exposed to it.
They suggest this was likely driven by strong similarities between the new coronavirus and the cold-related viruses.
you can not negotiate your way to a solution because you'll have to admit that an other side exists and it's valid.
|
|
|
On July 05 2021 00:46 xM(Z wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2021 21:17 Acrofales wrote:On July 04 2021 20:45 xM(Z wrote:On July 04 2021 15:07 Acrofales wrote:On July 04 2021 13:42 xM(Z wrote:
so everyone who died from covid was killed by someone else ... and that's the chinese? Without actually agreeing, let's say "yes" for the sake of argument. Why do you ask and where do you want to take this love of thought? well, it can't be yes because then you go into victimism. your argument is driven by a victims' mentality(personality trait) which defeats itself(you're unreceptive to evidence to the contrary). and it can't be no, because then, people who had covid and spread it around, didn't actually kill anyone(life happened) so you have with no argument to begin with; culpability goes out of the window. so you're left with this in-between shit, neither yes nor no, that needs to be negotiated between affected parties, reasonable adults, competent authorities ... etc; but you're incapable of negotiating life because no one taught you how to nor told you that you have to, in order to get along with ... other people. rejecting that conundrum, you fall back to your victim instincts and go with 'yes', then force the world to embrace/accept your take as the only reasonable one. now, if that's you, wouldn't people have objective reasons to ignore your take?; because after all, it comes from weakness. Aren't you a bit old to finally discover that not everything is black or white? I guess... better late than never? As to what you conclude afterwards, I don't really get. We can both attribute people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine, and take blame ourselves for not taking the virus seriously at the start of 2020 AND ALSO blame China for not doing their bit in stopping it from spreading and informing the world in time. None of those are mutually exclusive. "people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine" is just false, on two counts. there are cases in which refusing the vaccines is not negligent nor gets others sick. that take of yours tells me that even if you entertain the existence of an in between, you're fully white here(as are 99% of people in this topic). blaming something/someone is useless tryhard rhetoric; finding the cause for something though, should lead to practical consequences in dealing with the problem but for you, it doesn't. you'll forever be stuck with "people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine" mantra even when science shows that some people had preexisting immunity to covid before covid was a thing. + Show Spoiler +As part of their work, the scientists used serum samples provided by people who did not have COVID-19. To their surprise, they found antibodies that reacted to SARS-CoV-2 in some of the samples. In their paper, the researchers describe a scientific theory that exposure to any of the common human coronaviruses, which can cause the common cold, may lead to immunity against the other common human coronaviruses. They refer to this as immune cross-reactivity .simmilar studies were made in Germany, Netherlands and Singapore. The scientists suspected that this immune “memory” was linked to those people having previously fought off the common cold. A study published Tuesday in the journal Science describes how researchers from the La Jolla Institute for Immunology sought to find evidence supporting this theory.
They examined blood samples taken from healthy subjects collected before the pandemic and examined the T cells in those samples. T cells or, white blood cells, are key parts of the body’s immune system, triggering the antibodies that work to destroy infected cells.
The researchers say T cells remember past infections for decades after a person has had a certain illness. In the samples they examined, they found evidence of T cells “trained” to fight off viruses associated with the common cold. They also were surprised to see that many of the T cells in the sample also recognized COVID-19 without having ever been directly exposed to it.
They suggest this was likely driven by strong similarities between the new coronavirus and the cold-related viruses. you can not negotiate your way to a solution because you'll have to admit that an other side exists and it's valid.
I did not read about the two instances you mentioned in the bolded part in the rest of your post, but I am interested in hearing about them.
Regarding people being culpable through negligence.
it's all a numbers game.
Getting the virus, actually becoming ill, becoming ill from the vaccine - we can put a % number on all of these.
We can also do that with the causation of:
not getting the vaccine --> getting covid --> dying / infecting someone else --> this person dies or infects someone else who then dies or infects someone else who then dies.
Hence, it's negligent to not take the vaccine.
Ignorance is not just bliss, it also entails culpability.
We can advance this to the fact that going to work while ill and infecting someone else with flu or covid - I don't care which - makes you culpable for that person's suffering. Stay home, wear a mask if you must go (public transport / office and in case you go because your country doesn't support sick pay - vote accordingly if you dont want to be culpable.
What can we take away from that? If you focus on specific circumstances, it's easy to construct a case where there wasn't any choice but to infect others. Generally, this is not the case - unless you can make it, I would be most interested in that.
|
On July 05 2021 01:03 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2021 00:46 xM(Z wrote:On July 04 2021 21:17 Acrofales wrote:On July 04 2021 20:45 xM(Z wrote:On July 04 2021 15:07 Acrofales wrote:On July 04 2021 13:42 xM(Z wrote:
so everyone who died from covid was killed by someone else ... and that's the chinese? Without actually agreeing, let's say "yes" for the sake of argument. Why do you ask and where do you want to take this love of thought? well, it can't be yes because then you go into victimism. your argument is driven by a victims' mentality(personality trait) which defeats itself(you're unreceptive to evidence to the contrary). and it can't be no, because then, people who had covid and spread it around, didn't actually kill anyone(life happened) so you have with no argument to begin with; culpability goes out of the window. so you're left with this in-between shit, neither yes nor no, that needs to be negotiated between affected parties, reasonable adults, competent authorities ... etc; but you're incapable of negotiating life because no one taught you how to nor told you that you have to, in order to get along with ... other people. rejecting that conundrum, you fall back to your victim instincts and go with 'yes', then force the world to embrace/accept your take as the only reasonable one. now, if that's you, wouldn't people have objective reasons to ignore your take?; because after all, it comes from weakness. Aren't you a bit old to finally discover that not everything is black or white? I guess... better late than never? As to what you conclude afterwards, I don't really get. We can both attribute people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine, and take blame ourselves for not taking the virus seriously at the start of 2020 AND ALSO blame China for not doing their bit in stopping it from spreading and informing the world in time. None of those are mutually exclusive. "people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine" is just false, on two counts. there are cases in which refusing the vaccines is not negligent nor gets others sick. that take of yours tells me that even if you entertain the existence of an in between, you're fully white here(as are 99% of people in this topic). blaming something/someone is useless tryhard rhetoric; finding the cause for something though, should lead to practical consequences in dealing with the problem but for you, it doesn't. you'll forever be stuck with "people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine" mantra even when science shows that some people had preexisting immunity to covid before covid was a thing. + Show Spoiler +As part of their work, the scientists used serum samples provided by people who did not have COVID-19. To their surprise, they found antibodies that reacted to SARS-CoV-2 in some of the samples. In their paper, the researchers describe a scientific theory that exposure to any of the common human coronaviruses, which can cause the common cold, may lead to immunity against the other common human coronaviruses. They refer to this as immune cross-reactivity .simmilar studies were made in Germany, Netherlands and Singapore. The scientists suspected that this immune “memory” was linked to those people having previously fought off the common cold. A study published Tuesday in the journal Science describes how researchers from the La Jolla Institute for Immunology sought to find evidence supporting this theory.
They examined blood samples taken from healthy subjects collected before the pandemic and examined the T cells in those samples. T cells or, white blood cells, are key parts of the body’s immune system, triggering the antibodies that work to destroy infected cells.
The researchers say T cells remember past infections for decades after a person has had a certain illness. In the samples they examined, they found evidence of T cells “trained” to fight off viruses associated with the common cold. They also were surprised to see that many of the T cells in the sample also recognized COVID-19 without having ever been directly exposed to it.
They suggest this was likely driven by strong similarities between the new coronavirus and the cold-related viruses. you can not negotiate your way to a solution because you'll have to admit that an other side exists and it's valid. He did not say ALL people are, so if you want to continue to play these word games stop falsely attributing. That is a victims attitude and screams of personal weakness. How can you not play by the rules you yourself create? It just shows a personal weakness and fear based reasoning. Next thing you are going to blame some social problem on the government or immigration instead of taking personal responsibility. I'm not shocked, but I am disappointed.
i think i broadly agree with what you say
but i strongly disagree that social ills can be solved with "personal responsibility"
think thats just what the actual structures of power want the broadly powerless masses to believe
|
On July 04 2021 04:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2021 22:31 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:New French study claims the risk of 18-39 year olds (In France) dying from blood clots related to the AZ vaccine is double the lives saved from that age range from Covid due to the vaccine. https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40328123.htmlA new modelling study published in the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control’s (ECDC) medical journal has concluded that the dangers presented to younger people by the AstraZeneca vaccine are greater than the benefits.
The study, published in the weekly edition of the Eurosurveillance journal, models four months of a vaccine distribution strategy in France involving Vaxzevria (commonly called AstraZeneca) from May 2021, and concludes that using the vaccine on the entire adult population there would avert 10 deaths from Covid among 18-39-year-olds, but would be associated with 21 deaths from blood clotting in the same age grouping over the same time period. So vaccinating the entire French 18-39 population with AZ would save 10 lives due to COVID.Can we calm the fearmongering a little? What about sickness that doesn't lead to death, per se? Emergency room visits? Multi-organ failure? What about plenty of adults in their 20s and 30s passing on covid to older people and killing them? I feel like you're implying that if a person doesn't literally die, then their experience with covid isn't a big deal.
The biggest risk for covid in younger people is in obese people.If you guys want to talk personal responsibility if NA wasn’t so obese then they wouldn’t be having much issue.Of course the crazy lockdowns have actually worsened the obesity problem!!
https://theconversation.com/severe-covid-in-young-people-can-mostly-be-explained-by-obesity-new-study-159072
Severe COVID in young people can mostly be explained by obesity – new study
A study published last year in Nature reported that obesity increased the risk of COVID-related death substantially. People with the highest BMI (over 40) were at 92% higher risk of dying from COVID compared with people with a healthy BMI (18.5-25).
Emergency room visits for the vaccines happen as well, it’s why the FDA has slapped Heart warnings on the Pfizer vaccine for young people.Hundreds and hundreds of cases of myocarditis.And the victims have to pay for their own treatment since the manufacturers have no liability.USA medical system is a disgrace.
|
|
|
To be honest, I've stopped caring to some extent as to how vaccinated the world is. It affects me, eventually, but locally, ~85% of my neighbourhood ages 12+ are vaccinated and as a city, the Metro-Vancouver region is just over 80% of age 12+ vaccinated. Uptake of vaccines is 100% within my friends/contacts group, and the chances of me coming across an unvaccinated individual, infectious with Covid is near zero. I get my second dose invitation tomorrow (7 weeks after my first dose), and hopefully will be second dosed/fully immune mid-late July. Going by timing, I'm likely to get a mixed (pfizer/moderna) 2 dose course since we have a pfizer shortage for the first few weeks in July.
The heart inflammation thing is overblown IMO. It's an issue, yes, and something to be aware of but nowhere near the severity of the blood clots problem that AZ had.
|
I just came across another very good reason to get vaccinated: The vaccines are much less effective for people with a weaker immune system, and they are more vulnerable to covid-19 as well. The only way to bring covid-19 related deaths to 0 is herd immunity.
Something I absolutely love about vaccines is that they trigger the natural responses of the body to increase protection. The problems arise when those responses go overboard, which they very often do with a real Covid infection as well.
|
|
|
On July 06 2021 03:19 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2021 02:30 Lmui wrote:
To be honest, I've stopped caring to some extent as to how vaccinated the world is. It affects me, eventually, but locally, ~85% of my neighbourhood ages 12+ are vaccinated and as a city, the Metro-Vancouver region is just over 80% of age 12+ vaccinated. Uptake of vaccines is 100% within my friends/contacts group, and the chances of me coming across an unvaccinated individual, infectious with Covid is near zero. I get my second dose invitation tomorrow (7 weeks after my first dose), and hopefully will be second dosed/fully immune mid-late July. Going by timing, I'm likely to get a mixed (pfizer/moderna) 2 dose course since we have a pfizer shortage for the first few weeks in July.
The heart inflammation thing is overblown IMO. It's an issue, yes, and something to be aware of but nowhere near the severity of the blood clots problem that AZ had. I can't not look outside my bubble and look to the parts of the world that it is still a major issue in. I also think that now that we are onto the Delta plus and Lambda that getting it shut down sooner before one happens that the vaccines don't work for is prudent. But locally I'm not concerned either. Went shopping on the weekend under half wearing masks (I was not), most staff still is. Most companies are more worried than government at this point. I know a lot still recommending work from home and keeping key people separated so they don't go out of work at the time.
We're already vaccinating people in western countries at a pretty breakneck pace all things considered. The rest of the world will follow, but there's a lot of problems with storage/logistics/administration that are difficult to sort out. Some countries are "slow" like australia, but that will get sorted out by the end of the year.
It's pretty cold, but at this point Canada is going to move on, with covid as another of the infectious diseases we'll watch out for alongside the flu, assuming covid doesn't mutate too far. Despite everything, the mrna vaccines are incredibly effective against all variants so far, and don't really show many signs of needing changes. We have boosters ready if needed. I do think it's important to share what vaccines we can with other countries (ex. I'd like for Taiwan to get vaccines to ensure continuity in supply chains for semiconductors and bicycles, two things I care about), but that's less important than day to day things around me.
Most of Canada is at the bottom of this list now, with vaccination rates high enough to blunt any covid outbreaks in urban areas.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/covid-19-in-the-u-s-how-do-canada-s-provinces-rank-against-american-states-1.5051033
In other news, Europe's rolled out their vaccine passport scheme (My company helped develop it, I had no part in it though). GDPR compliant (name, DoB, vaccination status/covid relevant covid info) and secured with signing certificates as expected. Hard to fake, unless you can fake ID as well to copy someone who is actually vaccinated.
https://ec.europa.eu/info/live-work-travel-eu/coronavirus-response/safe-covid-19-vaccines-europeans/eu-digital-covid-certificate_en
Edit:: for perspective, in my health authority with ~1.2m people, we had 5 covid cases in the last 3 days. The majority of the region has 80%+ first dose rate for 12+. It's dropped far enough that covid isn't going to be a factor in daily life.
|
On July 06 2021 01:24 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2021 23:12 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On July 04 2021 04:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 03 2021 22:31 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:New French study claims the risk of 18-39 year olds (In France) dying from blood clots related to the AZ vaccine is double the lives saved from that age range from Covid due to the vaccine. https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40328123.htmlA new modelling study published in the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control’s (ECDC) medical journal has concluded that the dangers presented to younger people by the AstraZeneca vaccine are greater than the benefits.
The study, published in the weekly edition of the Eurosurveillance journal, models four months of a vaccine distribution strategy in France involving Vaxzevria (commonly called AstraZeneca) from May 2021, and concludes that using the vaccine on the entire adult population there would avert 10 deaths from Covid among 18-39-year-olds, but would be associated with 21 deaths from blood clotting in the same age grouping over the same time period. So vaccinating the entire French 18-39 population with AZ would save 10 lives due to COVID.Can we calm the fearmongering a little? What about sickness that doesn't lead to death, per se? Emergency room visits? Multi-organ failure? What about plenty of adults in their 20s and 30s passing on covid to older people and killing them? I feel like you're implying that if a person doesn't literally die, then their experience with covid isn't a big deal. The biggest risk for covid in younger people is in obese people.If you guys want to talk personal responsibility if NA wasn’t so obese then they wouldn’t be having much issue.Of course the crazy lockdowns have actually worsened the obesity problem!! https://theconversation.com/severe-covid-in-young-people-can-mostly-be-explained-by-obesity-new-study-159072Severe COVID in young people can mostly be explained by obesity – new study
A study published last year in Nature reported that obesity increased the risk of COVID-related death substantially. People with the highest BMI (over 40) were at 92% higher risk of dying from COVID compared with people with a healthy BMI (18.5-25).
Emergency room visits for the vaccines happen as well, it’s why the FDA has slapped Heart warnings on the Pfizer vaccine for young people.Hundreds and hundreds of cases of myocarditis.And the victims have to pay for their own treatment since the manufacturers have no liability.USA medical system is a disgrace. You do realize that the people who are not taking the vaccine for the most part are doing so, or at least they say they are, because they don't think Covid is that bad. Now that is 1-5% in the hospitalization risk and depending on the country, lets go low .5% risk of death.
I wouldn’t say that was the main reason people aren’t taking it.The main reason is people are concerned about side effects, the fact the vaccine is still in phase 3 trials with emergency use approval only and manufacturers are not liable for serious side effects all tie in to that but it’s all been discussed before.
As for the 1-5% hospitalisation, this is not for young people.As I said from the start of this the restrictions and recommendations should apply to those 70+, especially in nursing homes.The biggest preventable risk factor for covid in young people is obesity, which as I stated has gotten worse during lockdowns with stay at home orders and gym closures, not to mention locking yourself in your house isn’t great for Vitamin D levels which are also known to help the immune system fight covid.
The policies you support are having a massively detrimental impact on young people health wise, financially and mentally.
|
People being concerned about the side effects does not mean that the side effects are actually demonstrated to be dangerous. The evidence has shown conclusively that there is no "Cure is worse than the disease" BS going on. It works. If you have allergies, or are taking chemo, or have some other serious co-morbidity you should be wary. Otherwise, you're better for getting the shot, period.
|
|
|
On July 05 2021 01:29 Artisreal wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2021 00:46 xM(Z wrote:On July 04 2021 21:17 Acrofales wrote:On July 04 2021 20:45 xM(Z wrote:On July 04 2021 15:07 Acrofales wrote:On July 04 2021 13:42 xM(Z wrote:
so everyone who died from covid was killed by someone else ... and that's the chinese? Without actually agreeing, let's say "yes" for the sake of argument. Why do you ask and where do you want to take this love of thought? well, it can't be yes because then you go into victimism. your argument is driven by a victims' mentality(personality trait) which defeats itself(you're unreceptive to evidence to the contrary). and it can't be no, because then, people who had covid and spread it around, didn't actually kill anyone(life happened) so you have with no argument to begin with; culpability goes out of the window. so you're left with this in-between shit, neither yes nor no, that needs to be negotiated between affected parties, reasonable adults, competent authorities ... etc; but you're incapable of negotiating life because no one taught you how to nor told you that you have to, in order to get along with ... other people. rejecting that conundrum, you fall back to your victim instincts and go with 'yes', then force the world to embrace/accept your take as the only reasonable one. now, if that's you, wouldn't people have objective reasons to ignore your take?; because after all, it comes from weakness. Aren't you a bit old to finally discover that not everything is black or white? I guess... better late than never? As to what you conclude afterwards, I don't really get. We can both attribute people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine, and take blame ourselves for not taking the virus seriously at the start of 2020 AND ALSO blame China for not doing their bit in stopping it from spreading and informing the world in time. None of those are mutually exclusive. "people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine" is just false, on two counts. there are cases in which refusing the vaccines is not negligent nor gets others sick. that take of yours tells me that even if you entertain the existence of an in between, you're fully white here(as are 99% of people in this topic). blaming something/someone is useless tryhard rhetoric; finding the cause for something though, should lead to practical consequences in dealing with the problem but for you, it doesn't. you'll forever be stuck with "people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine" mantra even when science shows that some people had preexisting immunity to covid before covid was a thing. + Show Spoiler +As part of their work, the scientists used serum samples provided by people who did not have COVID-19. To their surprise, they found antibodies that reacted to SARS-CoV-2 in some of the samples. In their paper, the researchers describe a scientific theory that exposure to any of the common human coronaviruses, which can cause the common cold, may lead to immunity against the other common human coronaviruses. They refer to this as immune cross-reactivity .simmilar studies were made in Germany, Netherlands and Singapore. The scientists suspected that this immune “memory” was linked to those people having previously fought off the common cold. A study published Tuesday in the journal Science describes how researchers from the La Jolla Institute for Immunology sought to find evidence supporting this theory.
They examined blood samples taken from healthy subjects collected before the pandemic and examined the T cells in those samples. T cells or, white blood cells, are key parts of the body’s immune system, triggering the antibodies that work to destroy infected cells.
The researchers say T cells remember past infections for decades after a person has had a certain illness. In the samples they examined, they found evidence of T cells “trained” to fight off viruses associated with the common cold. They also were surprised to see that many of the T cells in the sample also recognized COVID-19 without having ever been directly exposed to it.
They suggest this was likely driven by strong similarities between the new coronavirus and the cold-related viruses. you can not negotiate your way to a solution because you'll have to admit that an other side exists and it's valid. I did not read about the two instances you mentioned in the bolded part in the rest of your post, but I am interested in hearing about them. Regarding people being culpable through negligence. it's all a numbers game. Getting the virus, actually becoming ill, becoming ill from the vaccine - we can put a % number on all of these. We can also do that with the causation of: not getting the vaccine --> getting covid --> dying / infecting someone else --> this person dies or infects someone else who then dies or infects someone else who then dies. Hence, it's negligent to not take the vaccine. Ignorance is not just bliss, it also entails culpability. We can advance this to the fact that going to work while ill and infecting someone else with flu or covid - I don't care which - makes you culpable for that person's suffering. Stay home, wear a mask if you must go (public transport / office and in case you go because your country doesn't support sick pay - vote accordingly if you dont want to be culpable. What can we take away from that? If you focus on specific circumstances, it's easy to construct a case where there wasn't any choice but to infect others. Generally, this is not the case - unless you can make it, I would be most interested in that. was in the spoiler. you don't have to get vaccinated because you already have everything the vaccine would provide for you.
the rest of your post = false equivocation gibberish. it's as if you just found out that your very existence in the world affects more/other people and it even can get some killed!.
even if you try and differentiate between negligence/on purpose or from ignorance/knowingly, you have nothing.
@jimmyC - it doesn't matter if he says ALL when his conclusion, his obligatory course of action, is imposed on all.
|
On July 06 2021 12:27 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2021 09:50 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On July 06 2021 01:24 JimmiC wrote:On July 05 2021 23:12 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On July 04 2021 04:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 03 2021 22:31 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:New French study claims the risk of 18-39 year olds (In France) dying from blood clots related to the AZ vaccine is double the lives saved from that age range from Covid due to the vaccine. https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40328123.htmlA new modelling study published in the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control’s (ECDC) medical journal has concluded that the dangers presented to younger people by the AstraZeneca vaccine are greater than the benefits.
The study, published in the weekly edition of the Eurosurveillance journal, models four months of a vaccine distribution strategy in France involving Vaxzevria (commonly called AstraZeneca) from May 2021, and concludes that using the vaccine on the entire adult population there would avert 10 deaths from Covid among 18-39-year-olds, but would be associated with 21 deaths from blood clotting in the same age grouping over the same time period. So vaccinating the entire French 18-39 population with AZ would save 10 lives due to COVID.Can we calm the fearmongering a little? What about sickness that doesn't lead to death, per se? Emergency room visits? Multi-organ failure? What about plenty of adults in their 20s and 30s passing on covid to older people and killing them? I feel like you're implying that if a person doesn't literally die, then their experience with covid isn't a big deal. The biggest risk for covid in younger people is in obese people.If you guys want to talk personal responsibility if NA wasn’t so obese then they wouldn’t be having much issue.Of course the crazy lockdowns have actually worsened the obesity problem!! https://theconversation.com/severe-covid-in-young-people-can-mostly-be-explained-by-obesity-new-study-159072Severe COVID in young people can mostly be explained by obesity – new study
A study published last year in Nature reported that obesity increased the risk of COVID-related death substantially. People with the highest BMI (over 40) were at 92% higher risk of dying from COVID compared with people with a healthy BMI (18.5-25).
Emergency room visits for the vaccines happen as well, it’s why the FDA has slapped Heart warnings on the Pfizer vaccine for young people.Hundreds and hundreds of cases of myocarditis.And the victims have to pay for their own treatment since the manufacturers have no liability.USA medical system is a disgrace. You do realize that the people who are not taking the vaccine for the most part are doing so, or at least they say they are, because they don't think Covid is that bad. Now that is 1-5% in the hospitalization risk and depending on the country, lets go low .5% risk of death. I wouldn’t say that was the main reason people aren’t taking it.The main reason is people are concerned about side effects, the fact the vaccine is still in phase 3 trials with emergency use approval only and manufacturers are not liable for serious side effects all tie in to that but it’s all been discussed before. As for the 1-5% hospitalisation, this is not for young people.As I said from the start of this the restrictions and recommendations should apply to those 70+, especially in nursing homes.The biggest preventable risk factor for covid in young people is obesity, which as I stated has gotten worse during lockdowns with stay at home orders and gym closures, not to mention locking yourself in your house isn’t great for Vitamin D levels which are also known to help the immune system fight covid. The policies you support are having a massively detrimental impact on young people health wise, financially and mentally. I support the policies the doctors suggest since they have BYFAR the most knowledge and have been mostly right. You seem to not realize that Covid has a massively detrimental impact on young, medium, and old people, health, financially and mentally. The measures do as well, but less, if you were at all aware you would notice that doing nothing is worse, and not a little but exponentially worse for health, financially and mentally. I wish I lived in a world where I could somehow ignore all the information outside of my own anecdotal experiences and pretend like there was this option where the government did nothing, no measures were taken and Covid just fizzled out. But sadly that is clearly a fantasy. So you can't act as if measures were the problem unless you think that no measures downsides are smaller, which would be incredibly hard to fathom someone actually thinking. You can look to countries where the did far to little, it is not pretty.
Really? What country with good healthcare did little and its not pretty?
|
On July 06 2021 13:58 xM(Z wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2021 01:29 Artisreal wrote:On July 05 2021 00:46 xM(Z wrote:On July 04 2021 21:17 Acrofales wrote:On July 04 2021 20:45 xM(Z wrote:On July 04 2021 15:07 Acrofales wrote:On July 04 2021 13:42 xM(Z wrote:
so everyone who died from covid was killed by someone else ... and that's the chinese? Without actually agreeing, let's say "yes" for the sake of argument. Why do you ask and where do you want to take this love of thought? well, it can't be yes because then you go into victimism. your argument is driven by a victims' mentality(personality trait) which defeats itself(you're unreceptive to evidence to the contrary). and it can't be no, because then, people who had covid and spread it around, didn't actually kill anyone(life happened) so you have with no argument to begin with; culpability goes out of the window. so you're left with this in-between shit, neither yes nor no, that needs to be negotiated between affected parties, reasonable adults, competent authorities ... etc; but you're incapable of negotiating life because no one taught you how to nor told you that you have to, in order to get along with ... other people. rejecting that conundrum, you fall back to your victim instincts and go with 'yes', then force the world to embrace/accept your take as the only reasonable one. now, if that's you, wouldn't people have objective reasons to ignore your take?; because after all, it comes from weakness. Aren't you a bit old to finally discover that not everything is black or white? I guess... better late than never? As to what you conclude afterwards, I don't really get. We can both attribute people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine, and take blame ourselves for not taking the virus seriously at the start of 2020 AND ALSO blame China for not doing their bit in stopping it from spreading and informing the world in time. None of those are mutually exclusive. "people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine" is just false, on two counts. there are cases in which refusing the vaccines is not negligent nor gets others sick. that take of yours tells me that even if you entertain the existence of an in between, you're fully white here(as are 99% of people in this topic). blaming something/someone is useless tryhard rhetoric; finding the cause for something though, should lead to practical consequences in dealing with the problem but for you, it doesn't. you'll forever be stuck with "people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine" mantra even when science shows that some people had preexisting immunity to covid before covid was a thing. + Show Spoiler +As part of their work, the scientists used serum samples provided by people who did not have COVID-19. To their surprise, they found antibodies that reacted to SARS-CoV-2 in some of the samples. In their paper, the researchers describe a scientific theory that exposure to any of the common human coronaviruses, which can cause the common cold, may lead to immunity against the other common human coronaviruses. They refer to this as immune cross-reactivity .simmilar studies were made in Germany, Netherlands and Singapore. The scientists suspected that this immune “memory” was linked to those people having previously fought off the common cold. A study published Tuesday in the journal Science describes how researchers from the La Jolla Institute for Immunology sought to find evidence supporting this theory.
They examined blood samples taken from healthy subjects collected before the pandemic and examined the T cells in those samples. T cells or, white blood cells, are key parts of the body’s immune system, triggering the antibodies that work to destroy infected cells.
The researchers say T cells remember past infections for decades after a person has had a certain illness. In the samples they examined, they found evidence of T cells “trained” to fight off viruses associated with the common cold. They also were surprised to see that many of the T cells in the sample also recognized COVID-19 without having ever been directly exposed to it.
They suggest this was likely driven by strong similarities between the new coronavirus and the cold-related viruses. you can not negotiate your way to a solution because you'll have to admit that an other side exists and it's valid. I did not read about the two instances you mentioned in the bolded part in the rest of your post, but I am interested in hearing about them. Regarding people being culpable through negligence. it's all a numbers game. Getting the virus, actually becoming ill, becoming ill from the vaccine - we can put a % number on all of these. We can also do that with the causation of: not getting the vaccine --> getting covid --> dying / infecting someone else --> this person dies or infects someone else who then dies or infects someone else who then dies. Hence, it's negligent to not take the vaccine. Ignorance is not just bliss, it also entails culpability. We can advance this to the fact that going to work while ill and infecting someone else with flu or covid - I don't care which - makes you culpable for that person's suffering. Stay home, wear a mask if you must go (public transport / office and in case you go because your country doesn't support sick pay - vote accordingly if you dont want to be culpable. What can we take away from that? If you focus on specific circumstances, it's easy to construct a case where there wasn't any choice but to infect others. Generally, this is not the case - unless you can make it, I would be most interested in that. was in the spoiler. you don't have to get vaccinated because you already have everything the vaccine would provide for you. the rest of your post = false equivocation gibberish. it's as if you just found out that your very existence in the world affects more/other people and it even can get some killed!. even if you try and differentiate between negligence/on purpose or from ignorance/knowingly, you have nothing. @jimmyC - it doesn't matter if he says ALL when his conclusion, his obligatory course of action, is imposed on all.
Thanks for pointing out the spoiler, that's my bad. Will have a look at it
Regarding the "gibberish", just because you don't put in the effort to understand doesn't mean I'm wrong.
Maybe show me where you think I'm wrong instead of stating it like it was a fact.
|
|
|
On July 06 2021 13:58 xM(Z wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2021 01:29 Artisreal wrote:On July 05 2021 00:46 xM(Z wrote:On July 04 2021 21:17 Acrofales wrote:On July 04 2021 20:45 xM(Z wrote:On July 04 2021 15:07 Acrofales wrote:On July 04 2021 13:42 xM(Z wrote:
so everyone who died from covid was killed by someone else ... and that's the chinese? Without actually agreeing, let's say "yes" for the sake of argument. Why do you ask and where do you want to take this love of thought? well, it can't be yes because then you go into victimism. your argument is driven by a victims' mentality(personality trait) which defeats itself(you're unreceptive to evidence to the contrary). and it can't be no, because then, people who had covid and spread it around, didn't actually kill anyone(life happened) so you have with no argument to begin with; culpability goes out of the window. so you're left with this in-between shit, neither yes nor no, that needs to be negotiated between affected parties, reasonable adults, competent authorities ... etc; but you're incapable of negotiating life because no one taught you how to nor told you that you have to, in order to get along with ... other people. rejecting that conundrum, you fall back to your victim instincts and go with 'yes', then force the world to embrace/accept your take as the only reasonable one. now, if that's you, wouldn't people have objective reasons to ignore your take?; because after all, it comes from weakness. Aren't you a bit old to finally discover that not everything is black or white? I guess... better late than never? As to what you conclude afterwards, I don't really get. We can both attribute people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine, and take blame ourselves for not taking the virus seriously at the start of 2020 AND ALSO blame China for not doing their bit in stopping it from spreading and informing the world in time. None of those are mutually exclusive. "people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine" is just false, on two counts. there are cases in which refusing the vaccines is not negligent nor gets others sick. that take of yours tells me that even if you entertain the existence of an in between, you're fully white here(as are 99% of people in this topic). blaming something/someone is useless tryhard rhetoric; finding the cause for something though, should lead to practical consequences in dealing with the problem but for you, it doesn't. you'll forever be stuck with "people being willfully negligent causing others to get sick if they refuse the vaccine" mantra even when science shows that some people had preexisting immunity to covid before covid was a thing. + Show Spoiler +As part of their work, the scientists used serum samples provided by people who did not have COVID-19. To their surprise, they found antibodies that reacted to SARS-CoV-2 in some of the samples. In their paper, the researchers describe a scientific theory that exposure to any of the common human coronaviruses, which can cause the common cold, may lead to immunity against the other common human coronaviruses. They refer to this as immune cross-reactivity .simmilar studies were made in Germany, Netherlands and Singapore. The scientists suspected that this immune “memory” was linked to those people having previously fought off the common cold. A study published Tuesday in the journal Science describes how researchers from the La Jolla Institute for Immunology sought to find evidence supporting this theory.
They examined blood samples taken from healthy subjects collected before the pandemic and examined the T cells in those samples. T cells or, white blood cells, are key parts of the body’s immune system, triggering the antibodies that work to destroy infected cells.
The researchers say T cells remember past infections for decades after a person has had a certain illness. In the samples they examined, they found evidence of T cells “trained” to fight off viruses associated with the common cold. They also were surprised to see that many of the T cells in the sample also recognized COVID-19 without having ever been directly exposed to it.
They suggest this was likely driven by strong similarities between the new coronavirus and the cold-related viruses. you can not negotiate your way to a solution because you'll have to admit that an other side exists and it's valid. I did not read about the two instances you mentioned in the bolded part in the rest of your post, but I am interested in hearing about them. Regarding people being culpable through negligence. it's all a numbers game. Getting the virus, actually becoming ill, becoming ill from the vaccine - we can put a % number on all of these. We can also do that with the causation of: not getting the vaccine --> getting covid --> dying / infecting someone else --> this person dies or infects someone else who then dies or infects someone else who then dies. Hence, it's negligent to not take the vaccine. Ignorance is not just bliss, it also entails culpability. We can advance this to the fact that going to work while ill and infecting someone else with flu or covid - I don't care which - makes you culpable for that person's suffering. Stay home, wear a mask if you must go (public transport / office and in case you go because your country doesn't support sick pay - vote accordingly if you dont want to be culpable. What can we take away from that? If you focus on specific circumstances, it's easy to construct a case where there wasn't any choice but to infect others. Generally, this is not the case - unless you can make it, I would be most interested in that. was in the spoiler. you don't have to get vaccinated because you already have everything the vaccine would provide for you. the rest of your post = false equivocation gibberish. it's as if you just found out that your very existence in the world affects more/other people and it even can get some killed!. even if you try and differentiate between negligence/on purpose or from ignorance/knowingly, you have nothing. @jimmyC - it doesn't matter if he says ALL when his conclusion, his obligatory course of action, is imposed on all.
I didn't actually talk of any course of action. Let alone an obligatory one. I think the logical conclusion from what I said is that people should take responsibility and get vaccinated, if not for themselves then to prevent themselves from infecting others. Not doing so should be seen as negligence.
Obviously if someone got the tests done from your spoiler and know they're immune to Covid, then them getting vaccinated does nothing. In fact, you could argue it is irresponsible for them to get vaccinated. But the number of people we're talking about is a few dozen at most, so seems a bit irrelevant to single out?
|
On July 06 2021 15:20 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2021 14:11 sharkie wrote:On July 06 2021 12:27 JimmiC wrote:On July 06 2021 09:50 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On July 06 2021 01:24 JimmiC wrote:On July 05 2021 23:12 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On July 04 2021 04:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 03 2021 22:31 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:New French study claims the risk of 18-39 year olds (In France) dying from blood clots related to the AZ vaccine is double the lives saved from that age range from Covid due to the vaccine. https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40328123.htmlA new modelling study published in the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control’s (ECDC) medical journal has concluded that the dangers presented to younger people by the AstraZeneca vaccine are greater than the benefits.
The study, published in the weekly edition of the Eurosurveillance journal, models four months of a vaccine distribution strategy in France involving Vaxzevria (commonly called AstraZeneca) from May 2021, and concludes that using the vaccine on the entire adult population there would avert 10 deaths from Covid among 18-39-year-olds, but would be associated with 21 deaths from blood clotting in the same age grouping over the same time period. So vaccinating the entire French 18-39 population with AZ would save 10 lives due to COVID.Can we calm the fearmongering a little? What about sickness that doesn't lead to death, per se? Emergency room visits? Multi-organ failure? What about plenty of adults in their 20s and 30s passing on covid to older people and killing them? I feel like you're implying that if a person doesn't literally die, then their experience with covid isn't a big deal. The biggest risk for covid in younger people is in obese people.If you guys want to talk personal responsibility if NA wasn’t so obese then they wouldn’t be having much issue.Of course the crazy lockdowns have actually worsened the obesity problem!! https://theconversation.com/severe-covid-in-young-people-can-mostly-be-explained-by-obesity-new-study-159072Severe COVID in young people can mostly be explained by obesity – new study
A study published last year in Nature reported that obesity increased the risk of COVID-related death substantially. People with the highest BMI (over 40) were at 92% higher risk of dying from COVID compared with people with a healthy BMI (18.5-25).
Emergency room visits for the vaccines happen as well, it’s why the FDA has slapped Heart warnings on the Pfizer vaccine for young people.Hundreds and hundreds of cases of myocarditis.And the victims have to pay for their own treatment since the manufacturers have no liability.USA medical system is a disgrace. You do realize that the people who are not taking the vaccine for the most part are doing so, or at least they say they are, because they don't think Covid is that bad. Now that is 1-5% in the hospitalization risk and depending on the country, lets go low .5% risk of death. I wouldn’t say that was the main reason people aren’t taking it.The main reason is people are concerned about side effects, the fact the vaccine is still in phase 3 trials with emergency use approval only and manufacturers are not liable for serious side effects all tie in to that but it’s all been discussed before. As for the 1-5% hospitalisation, this is not for young people.As I said from the start of this the restrictions and recommendations should apply to those 70+, especially in nursing homes.The biggest preventable risk factor for covid in young people is obesity, which as I stated has gotten worse during lockdowns with stay at home orders and gym closures, not to mention locking yourself in your house isn’t great for Vitamin D levels which are also known to help the immune system fight covid. The policies you support are having a massively detrimental impact on young people health wise, financially and mentally. I support the policies the doctors suggest since they have BYFAR the most knowledge and have been mostly right. You seem to not realize that Covid has a massively detrimental impact on young, medium, and old people, health, financially and mentally. The measures do as well, but less, if you were at all aware you would notice that doing nothing is worse, and not a little but exponentially worse for health, financially and mentally. I wish I lived in a world where I could somehow ignore all the information outside of my own anecdotal experiences and pretend like there was this option where the government did nothing, no measures were taken and Covid just fizzled out. But sadly that is clearly a fantasy. So you can't act as if measures were the problem unless you think that no measures downsides are smaller, which would be incredibly hard to fathom someone actually thinking. You can look to countries where the did far to little, it is not pretty. Really? What country with good healthcare did little and its not pretty? Italy, then there healthcare was overrun and they did something. Same thing happened in New York city. You do realize the measures were put in place when the "good healthcare" could not keep up right? It is very strange to me that very public events that happened recently are a mystery to some.
I could counter with Taiwan, Thailand, Japan, ...?
Also with Italy there are quite some documentations already on what really went wrong there. (bad restrictions by WHO/government, wrong treatments of covid patients)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
