|
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 September 03 2021 21:24 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
In places where masking is impossible, like inside restaurants while eating a meal, confirming vaccination is definitely one way to mitigate the health risks to your customers and employees, during a global pandemic. That makes a lot of sense to me, and if I owned a business that had moderate/heavy foot traffic / large groups of people, I would enforce this too.
yeah... well... I'm not sure where you were like exactly 1 year ago. But I was at a bar drinking with friends! And yeah, I visited restaurants! And maybe you remember: There were no vaccinations around!
They had my mentioned restrictions, like wearing a mask if you got up from your table, tables had to be spread out, you could only sit at a table with your own houshold or only one person of another,... but it was open to go!
As far as I understand the vaccination clause is, that they actually want to drop those restrictions!
If some businesses don't check for vaccinations or enforce mask mandates, they're enabling the spread of coronavirus. I would avoid those places and shop/eat at their competitors who are taking the pandemic more seriously.
It would be news to me, that this would be a "competition"! There is no "un-vaccinated [or tested] welcome" bars allowed! That's why they probably turn up in a basement!
|
On September 03 2021 22:14 Geisterkarle wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2021 21:24 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
In places where masking is impossible, like inside restaurants while eating a meal, confirming vaccination is definitely one way to mitigate the health risks to your customers and employees, during a global pandemic. That makes a lot of sense to me, and if I owned a business that had moderate/heavy foot traffic / large groups of people, I would enforce this too. yeah... well... I'm not sure where you were like exactly 1 year ago. But I was at a bar drinking with friends! And yeah, I visited restaurants! And maybe you remember: There were no vaccinations around!
So what? That was incredibly risky. Just because you or a business is taking risks doesn't mean those risks disappear. All I was talking about is whether or not these kinds of decisions are safe, given what we know about coronavirus, not whether or not you were able to make those decisions a year ago.
They had my mentioned restrictions, like wearing a mask if you got up from your table, tables had to be spread out, you could only sit at a table with your own houshold or only one person of another,... but it was open to go!
As far as I understand the vaccination clause is, that they actually want to drop those restrictions!
I would prefer those restrictions (e.g., spreading tables out, not having 100% capacity) stay in place *and* have the additional restriction of mandating vaccinations, but each business is going to operate based on what they think works best for them.
Show nested quote +If some businesses don't check for vaccinations or enforce mask mandates, they're enabling the spread of coronavirus. I would avoid those places and shop/eat at their competitors who are taking the pandemic more seriously. It would be news to me, that this would be a "competition"! There is no "un-vaccinated [or tested] welcome" bars allowed! That's why they probably turn up in a basement!
Good. The more pressure there is to be a responsible member of society, the better.
|
|
|
Facebook was censoring posts about coronavirus coming from the Wuhan lab until the Biden administration announced they were going to investigate that further. We now live in a world where a small group of people can determine what "the truth" is and they have the power to basically silence any dissenting opinions from the public forum that is social media. I think this is one of the most important events that has unfolded in my lifetime but it is hardly talked about. Fighting covid misinformation for public safety is the justification for this. Anyone more worried about covid than this is just naive, imo.
|
|
|
|
|
On September 03 2021 19:02 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Yep - political trust is a really important piece of capital for a democratic country, and one that is much easier to spend than to recreate. Consequently, any 'solution' to covid that diminishes trust is likely to have negative consequences at some point in time when some future crisis depends upon people having trust in their government.
Authoritarianism is an option, of course - you don't need people to trust government if they are afraid of disobeying - but I'd argue that this makes society significantly worse in other ways.
Once upon a time, we had monarchies and they were shitty. A king could collect taxes for his own wealth and just generally be a shit head. Humanity justifiably ended up deciding monarchies and that kinda thing sucked ass. After some unsavory stuff with communism and Hitler and stuff like that, we were like "maybe authoritarianism is just straight up ass lol".
It is totally understandable to look at past examples of extreme authoritarianism and say "ok huge yikes, stayyyy away!", but I think we have also looked at murder and said a similar thing. But we have chosen to carve out a little pocket of "ethical murder" and then slapped a sticker that says "MILITARY" on it. We take a couple steps back, inspect it a bit and say "Alright sounds good", then we move on.
I wonder if we could find ways/places where authoritarianism makes sense and is helpful, in very specific instances, without completely eroding our society and outlawing free thinking. I think we can. I think humanity is ambitious and creative enough to find a way to do it, some day. We started from hitting animals with sticks, eventually made fire, eventually electricity, eventually space travel, the internet. I think we have a good track record of being able to improve our society and just improve as a whole.
Personally, I think we can look at the state of the world and wonder if we are witnessing the unsavory side effects of democracy run amuck. What if we over reacted to bad instances of authoritarianism? What if we shiver at the thought of it the same way old folks shiver at the thought of socialism? Perhaps we can carve out a little slice of authoritarianism and use it for managing infection? Makes sense to me.
|
Saying that authoritarianism deals better with convid is bit strange feel we have seen different degrees of succes with it, China must successful but would not describe other countries like Russia as success.
|
On September 04 2021 00:48 Sapaio wrote:
Saying that authoritarianism deals better with convid is bit strange feel we have seen different degrees of succes with it, China must successful but would not describe other countries like Russia as success.
Russia specifically came out and said they won't require vaccines. You can be an authoritarian shit head in some ways while being an inept turd in others. What I am specifically saying is that applying authoritarian principles in certain, measured instances has the potential to do a lot of good. We shouldn't let ourselves be like boomers who scream in horror when someone whispers "socialism". We should strive to be less intellectually lazy than that.
|
Norway28714 Posts
I've read that Russia specifically has had problems with their population not wanting to vaccinate - largely because they don't trust their government.
source
It's not really a controversial opinion that a competent autocratic regime can and will outperform democracies in many ways. The one big problem that most / nearly all autocratic countries have encountered is - 'what about the time you get a shitty ruler'. A shitty elected president in a system with checks and balances can be bad, for sure, but the damage inflicted is significantly lower than what you get with a shitty dictator in a system with no boundaries for his power.
Power tends to be seized by bad rulers, and even when you get a good ruler, the succession almost always at some point results in a bad ruler (I mean, maybe a coup happens?), at which point you're back to big damage being inflicted.
I mean, I also think there's inherent value to many democratic values and freedoms that exist within our society, and I don't want to trade those values or freedoms for a more efficient society, but even acknowledging that the competent autocracy has certain strengths, I can't think of a single one in history that has been as competent as say, the Norwegian government of the past 70 years for a 70 year long period of time.
(edit - to be clear, I realize you weren't advocating for a fully autocratic regime. but imo, I have a hard time seeing that really be a plausible 'halfway solution' - because the norms and values important to a democratic regime - among them trust, transparency and open debate, would inevitably be eroded in a harmful manner through any type of 'targeted autocracy'.)
|
On September 03 2021 22:49 BlackJack wrote:
Facebook was censoring posts about coronavirus coming from the Wuhan lab until the Biden administration announced they were going to investigate that further. We now live in a world where a small group of people can determine what "the truth" is and they have the power to basically silence any dissenting opinions from the public forum that is social media. I think this is one of the most important events that has unfolded in my lifetime but it is hardly talked about. Fighting covid misinformation for public safety is the justification for this. Anyone more worried about covid than this is just naive, imo.
No, as far as I know, Facebook was censoring posts claiming that the virus is a biological, man-made weapon created by the Wuhan lab. Subtle difference, I know.
|
On September 04 2021 01:18 Liquid`Drone wrote:
(edit - to be clear, I realize you weren't advocating for a fully autocratic regime. but imo, I have a hard time seeing that really be a plausible 'halfway solution' - because the norms and values important to a democratic regime - among them trust, transparency and open debate, would inevitably be eroded in a harmful manner through any type of 'targeted autocracy'.)
You don't see this as simply not being ambitious enough? Why just close that door entirely and put our head in the sand? Why not try to find a way to make things better rather than shivering at the thought of what might happen later?
|
On September 04 2021 01:18 Liquid`Drone wrote:I've read that Russia specifically has had problems with their population not wanting to vaccinate - largely because they don't trust their government. sourceIt's not really a controversial opinion that a competent autocratic regime can and will outperform democracies in many ways. The one big problem that most / nearly all autocratic countries have encountered is - 'what about the time you get a shitty ruler'. A shitty elected president in a system with checks and balances can be bad, for sure, but the damage inflicted is significantly lower than what you get with a shitty dictator in a system with no boundaries for his power. Power tends to be seized by bad rulers, and even when you get a good ruler, the succession almost always at some point results in a bad ruler (I mean, maybe a coup happens?), at which point you're back to big damage being inflicted. I mean, I also think there's inherent value to many democratic values and freedoms that exist within our society, and I don't want to trade those values or freedoms for a more efficient society, but even acknowledging that the competent autocracy has certain strengths, I can't think of a single one in history that has been as competent as say, the Norwegian government of the past 70 years for a 70 year long period of time. (edit - to be clear, I realize you weren't advocating for a fully autocratic regime. but imo, I have a hard time seeing that really be a plausible 'halfway solution' - because the norms and values important to a democratic regime - among them trust, transparency and open debate, would inevitably be eroded in a harmful manner through any type of 'targeted autocracy'.)
I thinking many people have agreed with you through out history. And in must crisis situations even in democracies with see a shift towards autocratic mechanisms more power to government, less insight to the press. The problem with autocratic is that it can be fine to begin with, but it almost ways losses focus of best for the people and focus more on how to keep control over government and become filthy rich. You can maybe see some autocratic that focus on a religion or ideal like Iran or China. But i am pretty sure the leaders don't lack comforts.
Then there are other problem of that if you can make all the rules and choices in crisis then you can get it right or totally wrong also. Other side effect is that people can be afraid to admit if they do something wrong because of harsh punishment. I remember reports that the regional government tried to hide the convid outbreak to begin with. Another example would be Chernobyl (great series i would recommend seeing) .
|
I am a healty guy in my thrites. Tell me why I should get vaccinated? There is a higher chance of me getting bad side effects of the vaccine, rather than covid. Even if I get covid, I accept the consequences (in most cases in my age group nothing worse than a flue), and the immunity I gain from Covid itself is 10 times better tham from any vaccine. If the only thing vaccine does is keep people from getting seriously ill. It does not prevent people from getting covid neither spreading it. Why should I not trust my own immunesystem if it is working? Why should I get vaccinated when there is unknown longtime effects with no liabilty for the vaccine producers.
|
On September 04 2021 02:06 ThePhan2m wrote:
I am a healty guy in my thrites. Tell me why I should get vaccinated? There is a higher chance of me getting bad side effects of the vaccine, rather than covid. Even if I get covid, I accept the consequences (in most cases in my age group nothing worse than a flue), and the immunity I gain from Covid itself is 10 times better tham from any vaccine. If the only thing vaccine does is keep people from getting seriously ill. It does not prevent people from getting covid neither spreading it. Why should I not trust my own immunesystem if it is working? Why should I get vaccinated when there is unknown longtime effects with no liabilty for the vaccine producers.
I am pretty sure that none of what you just wrote is actually true.
|
Norway28714 Posts
There isn't a higher chance of you getting bad side effects from the vaccine than from covid. Everything after that line hinges on that line, and that line is wrong.
Anyway, you should do it to help us reach real herd immunity, even if you are not worried about what might happen to you specifically. If you are only concerned with yourself and you're a healthy norwegian guy in your thirties, then it honestly probably doesn't matter, because the chance that you will get really sick is really low, and you'll most certainly get proper health care if you do. (The chance, while really low, is still a lot higher than the chance that the vaccine gives you any serious side effects.) However, if you at all care about greater society, then you'll get vaccinated because it helps with the greater goal of curbing spread.
Also, if you are only concerned with yourself, then you would still get the vaccine because otherwise a lot of people are justifiably going to consider you a dick, and that's negative for you. I guess you can lie, though, if you are both only concerned with yourself and entirely lacking integrity. 
|
On September 04 2021 02:06 ThePhan2m wrote:
I am a healty guy in my thrites. Tell me why I should get vaccinated? There is a higher chance of me getting bad side effects of the vaccine, rather than covid. Even if I get covid, I accept the consequences (in most cases in my age group nothing worse than a flue), and the immunity I gain from Covid itself is 10 times better tham from any vaccine. If the only thing vaccine does is keep people from getting seriously ill. It does not prevent people from getting covid neither spreading it. Why should I not trust my own immunesystem if it is working? Why should I get vaccinated when there is unknown longtime effects with no liabilty for the vaccine producers.
Lets say you get infected and don't suffer anything big. You call the people you have been saying and tell them, and your grandmother is one of them, she gets sick even after getting vaccination and dies, now you can feel guilty for being selfish the rest of your life.
|
On September 04 2021 02:06 ThePhan2m wrote:
I am a healty guy in my thrites. Tell me why I should get vaccinated? There is a higher chance of me getting bad side effects of the vaccine, rather than covid. Even if I get covid, I accept the consequences (in most cases in my age group nothing worse than a flue), and the immunity I gain from Covid itself is 10 times better tham from any vaccine. If the only thing vaccine does is keep people from getting seriously ill. It does not prevent people from getting covid neither spreading it. Why should I not trust my own immunesystem if it is working? Why should I get vaccinated when there is unknown longtime effects with no liabilty for the vaccine producers.
As others have pointed out, the vaccine is very safe, especially the MRNA ones. There are no side effects that exceed the risk of covid.
We found that 52% (32/61) of home-isolated young adults, aged 16–30 years, had symptoms at 6 months, including loss of taste and/or smell (28%, 17/61), fatigue (21%, 13/61), dyspnea (13%, 8/61), impaired concentration (13%, 8/61) and memory problems (11%, 7/61).
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01433-3
52% chance of lingering side effects long after you've been infected, ~1/4 chance that your sense of taste/smell has not returned.
It's like seeing the final exam for a course is open book, and deciding that you'll walk into the exam and read the textbook while the exam is occurring, instead of studying beforehand. Yeah, you might pass, but you're guaranteed to do worse than if you studied for the exam.
|
What do you mean its very safe? It got a urgent approval because of COVID. It has not had proper longterm testing like any other vaccines require. And there is no other vaccine that has this many reported side effects in the past 30 years of vaccination. These numbers can be found in any official governments health databases. Not to mention the creator of the mrna vaccine said it should never be used on humans.
Anyone who need to be safe, can take the vaccine to be safe if that is what it does. I do not need you guys to guiltrip me into putting poisoned chemicals (however small doses) into my body to try save me from something 99.99 % cases my body does perfectly well itself. In no other time in history has this been amount of pressure to take something so untested to permanently alter my own defensemechanism. The fact that you guys think its perfectly safe considering cirmumstances is alarming. Do yourself a service and input more information about all this other than trough "accepted" biased mainstream media and "fact approved" facebook posts. Plenty of medical experts and vaccine experts which strongly disagree with this whole process that does not have their voices heard because it does not fit this mass vaccination "only solution" narrative.
And herd immunity? What kind of utopia is that on this type of disease? It cant be compared.
There is no proof it lasts more than max 1 year. And there is no stopping the spread even in the most vaccinated countris like Israel. We might see a scenario where we have to take a shot each year, and what this new type of vaccine does with yearly injection to the body is uknown.
|
On September 04 2021 03:33 ThePhan2m wrote:
What do you mean its very safe? It got a urgent approval because of COVID. It has not had proper longterm testing like any other vaccines require. And there is no other vaccine that has this many reported side effects in the past 30 years of vaccination. These numbers can be found in any official governments health databases. Not to mention the creator of the mrna vaccine said it should never be used on humans.
Anyone who need to be safe, can take the vaccine to be safe if that is what it does. I do not need you guys to guiltrip me into putting poisoned chemicals (however small doses) into my body to try save me from something 99.99 % cases my body does perfectly well itself. In no other time in history has this been amount of pressure to take something so untested to permanently alter my own defensemechanism. The fact that you guys think its perfectly safe considering cirmumstances is alarming. Do yourself a service and input more information about all this other than trough "accepted" biased mainstream media and "fact approved" facebook posts. Plenty of medical experts and vaccine experts which strongly disagree with this whole process that does not have their voices heard because it does not fit this mass vaccination "only solution" narrative.
And herd immunity? What kind of utopia is that on this type of disease? It cant be compared.
There is no proof it lasts more than max 1 year. And there is no stopping the spread even in the most vaccinated countris like Israel. We might see a scenario where we have to take a shot each year, and what this new type of vaccine does with yearly injection to the body is uknown.
People are linking you data and you are saying it isn’t true. That’s ridiculous. You aren’t worth engaging with if you reject data.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
