|
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 January 09 2022 09:16 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2022 08:41 Mohdoo wrote:On January 09 2022 08:39 BlackJack wrote:On January 09 2022 08:09 Gorsameth wrote:On January 09 2022 08:07 BlackJack wrote:On January 09 2022 07:41 JimmiC wrote:On January 09 2022 07:35 BlackJack wrote:On January 08 2022 22:50 JimmiC wrote:On January 08 2022 20:12 BlackJack wrote:On January 08 2022 16:54 RKC wrote:
So Djokovic's exemption is based on his recent COVID infection on 16 December 2021. Is there a scientific reason why reinfection is not possible within a short period of time? Or does infection build up short-term immunity? Anyway, science aside, seems a pretty iffy policy to grant exemptions based on infection history.
As for asymptomatic people, I'm wondering whether they would tend to have the virus in their bodies dormant or low levels, that the occasional flare may trigger positive result during testing. Meaning to say, maybe there are people out there who are immune and safe from the virus and also unlikely to infect others (and there's really no point testing and counting them in any meaningful statistics). If Novak was infected with COVID on 12/16/21 it's fairly safe to say that his protection against COVID infection is significantly better than a typical double-vaxxed person that would be permitted to play. (I assume 2 shots is all that is required). There's evidence that 2-dose series offers almost no protection against being infected with Omicron, for example this preprint study from Ontario that showed 2 doses offered no protection and a booster offered only 37% protection. There were similar results in a Danish study that showed negative vaccine efficacy in double-vaxxed people. So if the goal is to prevent transmission of COVID then Novak is probably one of the safest players to have in the tournament. But if the goal is to enforce a "we got our shots so he should have to get his too" doctrine of fairness then he should obviously be banned. Your source does not conclude this in anyway what so ever. Do you have any source that backs your assumption at all? You seriously need a source for that statement? We're seeing millions and millions of breakthrough cases of double vaxxed people right now. How many people do you think have had COVID reinfections 1 month after having COVID? https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/24/health/covid-19-reinfection-is-rare-severe-disease-rarer/index.html Im needing the source that "natural" immunity alone is better. Its clear that vaccination is doing a great job of keeping severity WAY down, but not a good job of stopping infections with omicron. It also clear that having both natural and vaccination is preforming even better. What I have not read about is anything with "natural alone" doing anything, ive read nothing about it. So if yoh have source it, if you have not stop stating your assumptions as fact. Its not a good assumption considering how similar it was preforming to vaccination without boosting and worse than boosting with delta. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-covid-19-hospitalizations-omicron-canada-data-vaccinated-unvaccinated/ What? Where have you been for the last 2 years? For many months in 2020 there was a debate whether COVID reinfection was even possible before it was decided that it was possible but very rare. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/health/coronavirus-reinfection.htmlBut these cases make the news precisely because they are rare, experts said: More than 38 million people worldwide have been infected with the coronavirus, and as of Monday, fewer than five of those cases have been confirmed by scientists to be reinfections. its almost like we're dealing with a new strain that is significantly more infectious that might change the math.
Again, we already see the double-vaxxed people have almost no protection against infection with Omicron. We have millions and millions of breakthrough cases, how many cases do you think exist of people being re-infected 1 month after having COVID? How much do you think the math needs to change to not be significantly better than 0%? Do you have reason to believe that this new variant will interact in a different way with our immune system where it may be possible to get re-infected month after month after month? vaxxed folks have much better medical outcomes than unvaxxed. You should not be saying stuff like this. A breakthrough case where someone has a sore throat can not be equated to someone on a ventilator. Plenty of states have released data showing what % of people hospitalized are vaxed or unvaxed. It is silly to say its all the same. Edit: And just to be clear, unvaxxed folks are currently causing cancer patients and other people to not get surgeries that would drastically improve their health outcomes. Massachusetts for example ran out of ICU beds last week and is pushing out surgeries. Why should I "not be saying stuff like this?" Are you incapable of comprehending the difference between protection against infection and protection against severe illness/death? Are you incapable of understanding that vaccines may help a lot better with the latter than with the former? I seriously don't understand this aversion to an honest and nuanced discussion but it really sours the experience of posting here.
Of course I am. But you are essentially spreading disinformation by pretending all infections are equivalent. This isn’t honest discussion, this is you being salty and disingenuously. You were pretending being vaccinated has no benefit. That’s blatantly wrong so of course I’m gonna call you out.
|
|
|
|
|
On January 09 2022 10:39 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2022 09:05 Razyda wrote:I should have known that if I check this thread my aversion to all kind of fanatics will make me post... So lets start: On January 05 2022 03:34 Acrofales wrote:Just in case someone took your rambling seriously, the side effects mentioned in that article about Australia are:
The most frequent reported side effects include a sore arm, headache, fever and chills.
I'm guessing Australian social security is beyond crap and people had to take unpaid leave. So, yeah, Australia faces a hefty bill for that. But that is neither the case in the UK nor Poland, where you can take paid sick leave in the case of the vaccine knocking you out. Unless you're arguing that these side effects are the knock-on effects are related to these side effects. Despite these side effects being fairly common side effects for any vaccine: it is your immune response doing what it's supposed to do. Btw, try the yellow fever vaccination, it's really unpleasant. Still rather that than actually get yellow fever! Yes, yes, you obviously right it is widely known that word "most" reduces math and numbers to rambling... especially if in the same article is "most" referring to 79000 and "overwhelming majority of"...9 On January 09 2022 07:41 JimmiC wrote:Im needing the source that "natural" immunity alone is better. Its clear that vaccination is doing a great job of keeping severity WAY down, but not a good job of stopping infections with omicron. It also clear that having both natural and vaccination is preforming even better. What I have not read about is anything with "natural alone" doing anything, ive read nothing about it. So if yoh have source it, if you have not stop stating your assumptions as fact. Its not a good assumption considering how similar it was preforming to vaccination without boosting and worse than boosting with delta. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-covid-19-hospitalizations-omicron-canada-data-vaccinated-unvaccinated/ There you go: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00676-9/fulltext"It also clear that having both natural and vaccination is preforming even better." Clearly. Exempt from second research: "In fact, one study found that previous COVID-19 was associated with increased adverse events following vaccination with the Comirnaty BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine (Pfizer–BioNTech)." Obviously medical research <<<<< news article I guess?? Your non peer reviewee study is using number from 2019 and even more than that it does not counter my poiny, it says nothing about the comined protection. It is talking about a slight rise in side effects. And it is wondering if natural has enough protection (for beta covid) given the increased side effects WHILE also awknowleging that they have no idea how long the immunity will last. You are posting something about the wrong strain and topic! You and Blackjack need to go to a optomitrist together or take some reading comprehension classes together.
Dude you clearly need some meds, but i dont think Vaccine is the right one:
2019: really? "Published:November 08, 2021"
Lancet is obviously less trustworthy than whatever news outlet out there, at least when it comes to medical data
"Im needing the source that "natural" immunity alone is better."
https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101
“If natural immunity is strongly protective, as the evidence to date suggests it is, then vaccinating people who have had covid-19 would seem to offer nothing or very little to benefit, logically leaving only harms—both the harms we already know about as well as those still unknown"
And what part of:
"In fact, one study found that previous COVID-19 was associated with increased adverse events following vaccination with the Comirnaty BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine (Pfizer–BioNTech)"
You did not understand?? or do you think that "increased adverse events" are better?? and where does it state "slight"?
"slight":
https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101
"A large study in the UK32 and another that surveyed people internationally33 found that people with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection experienced greater rates of side effects after vaccination. Among 2000 people who completed an online survey after vaccination, those with a history of covid-19 were 56% more likely to experience a severe side effect that required hospital care."
" awknowleging that they have no idea how long the immunity will last."
Eee.. so how long vaccines immunity lasts, before you need booster??
Natural one from SARS:
"Although those studies show that protection from reinfection is strong and persists for more than 10 months of follow-up,"
"Researchers have also found that people who recovered from SARS-CoV infection in 2002–03 continue to have memory T cells that are reactive to SARS-CoV proteins 17 years after that outbreak."
Remind me dear, after what time you need a booster and then second booster?
You are really fanatic, article in Lancet published and unquestioned by peers = "no peer review"  . While yourself linking articles from news outlets with personal opinions?(not based on any research - so just that: personal opinions)
"You are posting something about the wrong strain and topic! You and Blackjack need to go to a optomitrist together or take some reading comprehension classes together."
We, or you:
"It is known that SARS-CoV-2 infection induces specific and durable T-cell immunity, which has multiple SARS-CoV-2 spike protein targets (or epitopes) as well as other SARS-CoV-2 protein targets. The broad diversity of T-cell viral recognition serves to enhance protection to SARS-CoV-2 variants,15 with recognition of at least the alpha (B.1.1.7), beta (B.1.351), and gamma (P.1) variants of SARS-CoV-2."
Honestly if you going to challenge article - read it (or actually understand it)
|
On January 09 2022 10:20 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2022 09:16 BlackJack wrote:On January 09 2022 08:41 Mohdoo wrote:On January 09 2022 08:39 BlackJack wrote:On January 09 2022 08:09 Gorsameth wrote:On January 09 2022 08:07 BlackJack wrote:On January 09 2022 07:41 JimmiC wrote:On January 09 2022 07:35 BlackJack wrote:On January 08 2022 22:50 JimmiC wrote:On January 08 2022 20:12 BlackJack wrote:[quote] If Novak was infected with COVID on 12/16/21 it's fairly safe to say that his protection against COVID infection is significantly better than a typical double-vaxxed person that would be permitted to play. (I assume 2 shots is all that is required). There's evidence that 2-dose series offers almost no protection against being infected with Omicron, for example this preprint study from Ontario that showed 2 doses offered no protection and a booster offered only 37% protection. There were similar results in a Danish study that showed negative vaccine efficacy in double-vaxxed people. So if the goal is to prevent transmission of COVID then Novak is probably one of the safest players to have in the tournament. But if the goal is to enforce a "we got our shots so he should have to get his too" doctrine of fairness then he should obviously be banned. Your source does not conclude this in anyway what so ever. Do you have any source that backs your assumption at all? You seriously need a source for that statement? We're seeing millions and millions of breakthrough cases of double vaxxed people right now. How many people do you think have had COVID reinfections 1 month after having COVID? https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/24/health/covid-19-reinfection-is-rare-severe-disease-rarer/index.html Im needing the source that "natural" immunity alone is better. Its clear that vaccination is doing a great job of keeping severity WAY down, but not a good job of stopping infections with omicron. It also clear that having both natural and vaccination is preforming even better. What I have not read about is anything with "natural alone" doing anything, ive read nothing about it. So if yoh have source it, if you have not stop stating your assumptions as fact. Its not a good assumption considering how similar it was preforming to vaccination without boosting and worse than boosting with delta. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-covid-19-hospitalizations-omicron-canada-data-vaccinated-unvaccinated/ What? Where have you been for the last 2 years? For many months in 2020 there was a debate whether COVID reinfection was even possible before it was decided that it was possible but very rare. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/health/coronavirus-reinfection.htmlBut these cases make the news precisely because they are rare, experts said: More than 38 million people worldwide have been infected with the coronavirus, and as of Monday, fewer than five of those cases have been confirmed by scientists to be reinfections. its almost like we're dealing with a new strain that is significantly more infectious that might change the math.
Again, we already see the double-vaxxed people have almost no protection against infection with Omicron. We have millions and millions of breakthrough cases, how many cases do you think exist of people being re-infected 1 month after having COVID? How much do you think the math needs to change to not be significantly better than 0%? Do you have reason to believe that this new variant will interact in a different way with our immune system where it may be possible to get re-infected month after month after month? vaxxed folks have much better medical outcomes than unvaxxed. You should not be saying stuff like this. A breakthrough case where someone has a sore throat can not be equated to someone on a ventilator. Plenty of states have released data showing what % of people hospitalized are vaxed or unvaxed. It is silly to say its all the same. Edit: And just to be clear, unvaxxed folks are currently causing cancer patients and other people to not get surgeries that would drastically improve their health outcomes. Massachusetts for example ran out of ICU beds last week and is pushing out surgeries. Why should I "not be saying stuff like this?" Are you incapable of comprehending the difference between protection against infection and protection against severe illness/death? Are you incapable of understanding that vaccines may help a lot better with the latter than with the former? I seriously don't understand this aversion to an honest and nuanced discussion but it really sours the experience of posting here. Of course I am. But you are essentially spreading disinformation by pretending all infections are equivalent. This isn’t honest discussion, this is you being salty and disingenuously. You were pretending being vaccinated has no benefit. That’s blatantly wrong so of course I’m gonna call you out.
No, I wasn't "pretending being vaccinated has no benefit." That's something you chose to infer for whatever reason. I said that there is evidence that being double vaxxed offers no protection against infection with Onicron. I linked the article from Ontario Public Health 2 pages ago. Here is how they worded it:
Results We included 3,442 Omicron-positive cases, 9,201 Delta-positive cases, and 471,545 test-negative controls. After 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccine, vaccine effectiveness against Delta infection declined steadily over time but recovered to 93% (95%CI, 92-94%) ≥7 days after receiving an mRNA vaccine for the third dose. In contrast, receipt of 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccines was not protective against Omicron. Vaccine effectiveness against Omicron was 37% (95%CI, 19-50%) ≥7 days after receiving an mRNA vaccine for the third dose.
Conclusions Two doses of COVID-19 vaccines are unlikely to protect against infection by Omicron. A third dose provides some protection in the immediate term, but substantially less than against Delta. Our results may be confounded by behaviours that we were unable to account for in our analyses. Further research is needed to examine protection against severe outcomes.
Maybe you can lecture those researchers about spreading disinformation. Or maybe just accept the fact that something isn't "disinformation" just because it upsets you.
|
I think it’s poorly worded but you’re right that you’re just saying what they said. Infection is rarely a 1 or a 0, as we are seeing with all these hospitals testing people with no symptoms. You can be barely infected, or very infected, or somewhere in between, so focusing on complete and total prevention isn’t a useful metric imo. Especially since many traditional vaccines are not intended to absolutely prevent all infection but tether make it not as bad.
But you are right and I apologize for making it sound like you were spinning it.
|
Yes, it would be good to breakdown the types of infections. It's rather absolute to think that all forms of natural infection is better than vaccination for everyone, but also to dismiss the possibility that certain people being infected may be just as safe as being vaccinated in the first place. Of course, a blanket vaccination policy is necessary in a pandemic - better safe than sorry. But it's good to dig deeper to identity whether there is a class of people - even if it's just a small pool - that may be naturally safe from worst effects of the virus. That way, governments can channel their resources more efficiently (eg prioritise boosters for more vulnerable folks) especially in less-developed societies.
|
The smallest party here in parliament has 4 out of 13 members vaccinated. Yet they organise anti-vaccine protest on 12 January. That's hilarious. :D
They don't talk about this fact, media uncovered it.
On January 09 2022 16:21 Mohdoo wrote:
I think it’s poorly worded but you’re right that you’re just saying what they said. Infection is rarely a 1 or a 0, as we are seeing with all these hospitals testing people with no symptoms. You can be barely infected, or very infected, or somewhere in between, so focusing on complete and total prevention isn’t a useful metric imo. Especially since many traditional vaccines are not intended to absolutely prevent all infection but tether make it not as bad.
But you are right and I apologize for making it sound like you were spinning it.
Can one be half pregnant? Your statement makes no sense - "barely infected" or "very infected". You are either infected or not. The words you seek are asymptomatic or symptomatic.
|
Corona didn't affect my life much. I was lucky enough to work remotely, and when I was infected in the summer of 2021, it went well. Unironically I'll say I've improved my life because of the corona; I could focus harder on my education, work and relationship area.
|
On January 09 2022 16:21 Mohdoo wrote:
I think it’s poorly worded but you’re right that you’re just saying what they said. Infection is rarely a 1 or a 0, as we are seeing with all these hospitals testing people with no symptoms. You can be barely infected, or very infected, or somewhere in between, so focusing on complete and total prevention isn’t a useful metric imo. Especially since many traditional vaccines are not intended to absolutely prevent all infection but tether make it not as bad.
But you are right and I apologize for making it sound like you were spinning it.
I accept your apology
|
About the discussions above, guys, decide for yourself. Its a lot of confusion going on online. I have several friends that are afraid to inject vaccines because they heard how their friends died after taking the vaccine - and the media didn't cover it. So again, decide for yourself: is it worth it or not.
"their friends" was on a group of risk: older than 40
|
On January 09 2022 20:48 Larry_Equadoro wrote:
About the discussions above, guys, decide for yourself. Its a lot of confusion going on online. I have several friends that are afraid to inject vaccines because they heard how their friends died after taking the vaccine - and the media didn't cover it. So again, decide for yourself: is it worth it or not.
"their friends" was on a group of risk: older than 40
There is no confusion regarding vaccines. I haven't heard of anyone dieing from the mRNA vaccines, there were some complications regarding j&j last year in certain populations. Your friends are very unlucky to know multiple people in the 1 in 4'000'000 or whatever it was that got blood clots + even further that went to die from said complications. This is not even a concern in many countries since they are exclusively mRNA.
There is no decision to make: vaccines are worth it.
|
On January 09 2022 21:04 emperorchampion wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2022 20:48 Larry_Equadoro wrote:
About the discussions above, guys, decide for yourself. Its a lot of confusion going on online. I have several friends that are afraid to inject vaccines because they heard how their friends died after taking the vaccine - and the media didn't cover it. So again, decide for yourself: is it worth it or not.
"their friends" was on a group of risk: older than 40 There is no confusion regarding vaccines. I haven't heard of anyone dieing from the mRNA vaccines, there were some complications regarding j&j last year in certain populations. Your friends are very unlucky to know multiple people in the 1 in 4'000'000 or whatever it was that got blood clots + even further that went to die from said complications. This is not even a concern in many countries since they are exclusively mRNA. There is no decision to make: vaccines are worth it.
Let me ask you: are you taking responsibility for people lives? Even I agree with your points about chances, you are just a regular guy on the internet, people have to decide for themselves and be responsible.
I`m not against vaccines and not vaccine lobbyists, just want to make a point about personal responsibility.
|
On January 09 2022 09:47 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2022 09:16 BlackJack wrote:On January 09 2022 08:41 Mohdoo wrote:On January 09 2022 08:39 BlackJack wrote:On January 09 2022 08:09 Gorsameth wrote:On January 09 2022 08:07 BlackJack wrote:On January 09 2022 07:41 JimmiC wrote:On January 09 2022 07:35 BlackJack wrote:On January 08 2022 22:50 JimmiC wrote:On January 08 2022 20:12 BlackJack wrote:[quote] If Novak was infected with COVID on 12/16/21 it's fairly safe to say that his protection against COVID infection is significantly better than a typical double-vaxxed person that would be permitted to play. (I assume 2 shots is all that is required). There's evidence that 2-dose series offers almost no protection against being infected with Omicron, for example this preprint study from Ontario that showed 2 doses offered no protection and a booster offered only 37% protection. There were similar results in a Danish study that showed negative vaccine efficacy in double-vaxxed people. So if the goal is to prevent transmission of COVID then Novak is probably one of the safest players to have in the tournament. But if the goal is to enforce a "we got our shots so he should have to get his too" doctrine of fairness then he should obviously be banned. Your source does not conclude this in anyway what so ever. Do you have any source that backs your assumption at all? You seriously need a source for that statement? We're seeing millions and millions of breakthrough cases of double vaxxed people right now. How many people do you think have had COVID reinfections 1 month after having COVID? https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/24/health/covid-19-reinfection-is-rare-severe-disease-rarer/index.html Im needing the source that "natural" immunity alone is better. Its clear that vaccination is doing a great job of keeping severity WAY down, but not a good job of stopping infections with omicron. It also clear that having both natural and vaccination is preforming even better. What I have not read about is anything with "natural alone" doing anything, ive read nothing about it. So if yoh have source it, if you have not stop stating your assumptions as fact. Its not a good assumption considering how similar it was preforming to vaccination without boosting and worse than boosting with delta. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-covid-19-hospitalizations-omicron-canada-data-vaccinated-unvaccinated/ What? Where have you been for the last 2 years? For many months in 2020 there was a debate whether COVID reinfection was even possible before it was decided that it was possible but very rare. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/health/coronavirus-reinfection.htmlBut these cases make the news precisely because they are rare, experts said: More than 38 million people worldwide have been infected with the coronavirus, and as of Monday, fewer than five of those cases have been confirmed by scientists to be reinfections. its almost like we're dealing with a new strain that is significantly more infectious that might change the math.
Again, we already see the double-vaxxed people have almost no protection against infection with Omicron. We have millions and millions of breakthrough cases, how many cases do you think exist of people being re-infected 1 month after having COVID? How much do you think the math needs to change to not be significantly better than 0%? Do you have reason to believe that this new variant will interact in a different way with our immune system where it may be possible to get re-infected month after month after month? vaxxed folks have much better medical outcomes than unvaxxed. You should not be saying stuff like this. A breakthrough case where someone has a sore throat can not be equated to someone on a ventilator. Plenty of states have released data showing what % of people hospitalized are vaxed or unvaxed. It is silly to say its all the same. Edit: And just to be clear, unvaxxed folks are currently causing cancer patients and other people to not get surgeries that would drastically improve their health outcomes. Massachusetts for example ran out of ICU beds last week and is pushing out surgeries. Why should I "not be saying stuff like this?" Are you incapable of comprehending the difference between protection against infection and protection against severe illness/death? Are you incapable of understanding that vaccines may help a lot better with the latter than with the former? I seriously don't understand this aversion to an honest and nuanced discussion but it really sours the experience of posting here. I don’t think Mohdoo is incapable of processing such a distinction, as per his response to my last posting. You’re asking questions beyond the pay grade of anyone in this thread, well specifically ‘Do you have reason to believe that this new variant will interact in a different way with our immune system where it may be possible to get re-infected month after month after month?’ I don’t think we know anything to answer that question with anything other than base speculation. It’s pretty clear the vaccines are considerably less effective against Omicron, I don’t think anyone disputes that. I would assume that, on aggregate even the low end estimates of protection add up to quite a meaningful level of protection if we’re talking about spread across whole populations. I can’t speak with any authority on how that impacts things. But say 30-40% is relatively bad protection for an individual, but if everyone in society has that level of protection it’s still pretty impactful. The only confirmed and consistent data we’ve been getting for quite some time is a comparison in hospitalisation rates and vaccination status. There are other phenomena at play, stuff it would be interesting to discuss but I’ve not seen the data on that, so it’s difficult to discuss.
I don't think that's above anyone's paygrade. I think that's just a basic understanding of our immune system. After your body mounts a defense against an intruder it is well primed to defeat that intruder the next time it encounters it. If this didn't work then the vaccines wouldn't work because the vaccines just manipulate your body into mounting this response and then remembering it. This is basically true for not just all the COVID variants but for all viruses in general. So the idea that we don't really know if Novak Djokovic has good protection against COVID if he was infected 1 month ago just because this Omicron variant is "new" would require some bizarre level of skepticism to believe that Omicron behaves differently than not just the other variants but from basically every virus in history. But I'm pretty sure you more or less agreed with me that if Novak was infected last month he has better protection than the typical double-vaxxed person.
|
On January 09 2022 21:18 Larry_Equadoro wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2022 21:04 emperorchampion wrote:On January 09 2022 20:48 Larry_Equadoro wrote:
About the discussions above, guys, decide for yourself. Its a lot of confusion going on online. I have several friends that are afraid to inject vaccines because they heard how their friends died after taking the vaccine - and the media didn't cover it. So again, decide for yourself: is it worth it or not.
"their friends" was on a group of risk: older than 40 There is no confusion regarding vaccines. I haven't heard of anyone dieing from the mRNA vaccines, there were some complications regarding j&j last year in certain populations. Your friends are very unlucky to know multiple people in the 1 in 4'000'000 or whatever it was that got blood clots + even further that went to die from said complications. This is not even a concern in many countries since they are exclusively mRNA. There is no decision to make: vaccines are worth it. Let me ask you: are you taking responsibility for people lives? Even I agree with your points about chances, you are just a regular guy on the internet, people have to decide for themselves and be responsible. I`m not against vaccines and not vaccine lobbyists, just want to make a point about personal responsibility.
The vaccines were proven safe and effective. They are safer than medicines those anti-vaxxers don't think twice about taking. And not getting vaccinated is not a personal choice if it affects others.
|
On January 09 2022 20:48 Larry_Equadoro wrote:
About the discussions above, guys, decide for yourself. Its a lot of confusion going on online. I have several friends that are afraid to inject vaccines because they heard how their friends died after taking the vaccine - and the media didn't cover it. So again, decide for yourself: is it worth it or not.
"their friends" was on a group of risk: older than 40
Nice to see sensible person in this thread. Sadly I dont think you will last long... Look at the Torquemada here:
On January 09 2022 21:04 emperorchampion wrote:
There is no decision to make: vaccines are worth it.
Now that great emperorchampion himself explained everyone's doubts shall vanish. People unable to embrace his holy words are clearly unable to make decisions by themselves and should be hunted down for a greater good. Maybe start with some mild encouragement, like I dont know, maybe pay 100 bucks for each scalp of unvaccinated person...?, execution of a household for hiding unvaccinated person...
User was warned for this post.
|
On January 09 2022 19:20 SC-Shield wrote:The smallest party here in parliament has 4 out of 13 members vaccinated. Yet they organise anti-vaccine protest on 12 January. That's hilarious. :D They don't talk about this fact, media uncovered it. Show nested quote +On January 09 2022 16:21 Mohdoo wrote:
I think it’s poorly worded but you’re right that you’re just saying what they said. Infection is rarely a 1 or a 0, as we are seeing with all these hospitals testing people with no symptoms. You can be barely infected, or very infected, or somewhere in between, so focusing on complete and total prevention isn’t a useful metric imo. Especially since many traditional vaccines are not intended to absolutely prevent all infection but tether make it not as bad.
But you are right and I apologize for making it sound like you were spinning it. Can one be half pregnant? Your statement makes no sense - "barely infected" or "very infected". You are either infected or not. The words you seek are asymptomatic or symptomatic.
Pregnancy and infection are not the same.
Microorganisms are on almost every object or surface in the world. When you get a paper cut, even a very small one, microorganisms enter your body. Every single time. If you did not have an immune system, you would eventually die from a paper cut infecting your whole body. But that doesn’t happen. You also eat some small amount of microorganisms every day that you eat. They manage to reproduce a little bit, but in the end, you end up fighting back the infection almost every time.
In short, you are “infected” all the time by various things but you never realize it because your body takes care of it before it becomes an issue. Your paper cut doesn’t get swollen, you don’t get flu symptoms, everything is totally casual. But you were “infected”. That’s why I am saying talking about an infection as if it’s the same every time doesn’t make sense. If a single virus makes it into my body, it’s very likely I will “get sick”. You need many more than that to overwhelm an immune system.
|
|
|
Northern Ireland27077 Posts
On January 09 2022 21:23 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2022 09:47 WombaT wrote:On January 09 2022 09:16 BlackJack wrote:On January 09 2022 08:41 Mohdoo wrote:On January 09 2022 08:39 BlackJack wrote:On January 09 2022 08:09 Gorsameth wrote:On January 09 2022 08:07 BlackJack wrote:On January 09 2022 07:41 JimmiC wrote:On January 09 2022 07:35 BlackJack wrote:On January 08 2022 22:50 JimmiC wrote:
[quote]
Your source does not conclude this in anyway what so ever. Do you have any source that backs your assumption at all?
You seriously need a source for that statement? We're seeing millions and millions of breakthrough cases of double vaxxed people right now. How many people do you think have had COVID reinfections 1 month after having COVID? https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/24/health/covid-19-reinfection-is-rare-severe-disease-rarer/index.html Im needing the source that "natural" immunity alone is better. Its clear that vaccination is doing a great job of keeping severity WAY down, but not a good job of stopping infections with omicron. It also clear that having both natural and vaccination is preforming even better. What I have not read about is anything with "natural alone" doing anything, ive read nothing about it. So if yoh have source it, if you have not stop stating your assumptions as fact. Its not a good assumption considering how similar it was preforming to vaccination without boosting and worse than boosting with delta. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-covid-19-hospitalizations-omicron-canada-data-vaccinated-unvaccinated/ What? Where have you been for the last 2 years? For many months in 2020 there was a debate whether COVID reinfection was even possible before it was decided that it was possible but very rare. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/health/coronavirus-reinfection.htmlBut these cases make the news precisely because they are rare, experts said: More than 38 million people worldwide have been infected with the coronavirus, and as of Monday, fewer than five of those cases have been confirmed by scientists to be reinfections. its almost like we're dealing with a new strain that is significantly more infectious that might change the math.
Again, we already see the double-vaxxed people have almost no protection against infection with Omicron. We have millions and millions of breakthrough cases, how many cases do you think exist of people being re-infected 1 month after having COVID? How much do you think the math needs to change to not be significantly better than 0%? Do you have reason to believe that this new variant will interact in a different way with our immune system where it may be possible to get re-infected month after month after month? vaxxed folks have much better medical outcomes than unvaxxed. You should not be saying stuff like this. A breakthrough case where someone has a sore throat can not be equated to someone on a ventilator. Plenty of states have released data showing what % of people hospitalized are vaxed or unvaxed. It is silly to say its all the same. Edit: And just to be clear, unvaxxed folks are currently causing cancer patients and other people to not get surgeries that would drastically improve their health outcomes. Massachusetts for example ran out of ICU beds last week and is pushing out surgeries. Why should I "not be saying stuff like this?" Are you incapable of comprehending the difference between protection against infection and protection against severe illness/death? Are you incapable of understanding that vaccines may help a lot better with the latter than with the former? I seriously don't understand this aversion to an honest and nuanced discussion but it really sours the experience of posting here. I don’t think Mohdoo is incapable of processing such a distinction, as per his response to my last posting. You’re asking questions beyond the pay grade of anyone in this thread, well specifically ‘Do you have reason to believe that this new variant will interact in a different way with our immune system where it may be possible to get re-infected month after month after month?’ I don’t think we know anything to answer that question with anything other than base speculation. It’s pretty clear the vaccines are considerably less effective against Omicron, I don’t think anyone disputes that. I would assume that, on aggregate even the low end estimates of protection add up to quite a meaningful level of protection if we’re talking about spread across whole populations. I can’t speak with any authority on how that impacts things. But say 30-40% is relatively bad protection for an individual, but if everyone in society has that level of protection it’s still pretty impactful. The only confirmed and consistent data we’ve been getting for quite some time is a comparison in hospitalisation rates and vaccination status. There are other phenomena at play, stuff it would be interesting to discuss but I’ve not seen the data on that, so it’s difficult to discuss. I don't think that's above anyone's paygrade. I think that's just a basic understanding of our immune system. After your body mounts a defense against an intruder it is well primed to defeat that intruder the next time it encounters it. If this didn't work then the vaccines wouldn't work because the vaccines just manipulate your body into mounting this response and then remembering it. This is basically true for not just all the COVID variants but for all viruses in general. So the idea that we don't really know if Novak Djokovic has good protection against COVID if he was infected 1 month ago just because this Omicron variant is "new" would require some bizarre level of skepticism to believe that Omicron behaves differently than not just the other variants but from basically every virus in history. But I'm pretty sure you more or less agreed with me that if Novak was infected last month he has better protection than the typical double-vaxxed person.
Right, I misread. You said essentially, is Omicron in isolation going to interact in a unique, new way with our immune response, to the degree that continuous short term reinfection will happen?’ would that be a correct paraphrasing?
Which it won’t, because it’s a virus, and the immune system is the immune system, yes that isn’t beyond our pay grade here.
I misread that as ‘will Omicron react sufficiently differently with our immune system from other variants, that immunity conferred by other variants won’t be a large protective factor’
Different statements, my reading comprehension as per usual has let me down.
Perhaps not beyond our collective pay grade, certainly beyond mine anyway! I’ve certainly not seen the data taking many factors into account. One key question would be, is the lack of vaccine effectiveness due primarily to the passage of time, or are they just outright not effective against Omicron? And likewise natural immunity.
I can’t see Djokovic not being protected, unless somehow Omicron completely punches through prior immunity from other variants, and I’ve seen nothing to indicate that is that case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
