EPTCoronavirus and You - Page 612
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
| ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
On July 30 2022 05:18 BlackJack wrote: I love being this threads resident “antivaxxer” despite the fact that I got my first shot in December 2020 days after it was authorized and I’m clearly the only person that feels so supremely confident in my 3 shots to protect me that I don’t insist that everyone else around me also needs to be vaccinated in order for my 3 shots to work. You know… just the usual antivaxx rhetoric. Carry on. What's your actual problem with them covid vaccines again? You're conflating so many points in time that it's hard to track what period of the pandemic you're talking about. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46279 Posts
On July 30 2022 05:18 BlackJack wrote: I love being this threads resident “antivaxxer” despite the fact that I got my first shot in December 2020 days after it was authorized and I’m clearly the only person that feels so supremely confident in my 3 shots to protect me that I don’t insist that everyone else around me also needs to be vaccinated in order for my 3 shots to work. You know… just the usual antivaxx rhetoric. Carry on. While it's awesome that you're vaccinated, you seem to be consistently questioning the importance of everyone else getting vaccinated. You're downplaying the importance of the vaccine by saying that people should explore alternatives instead of - not in addition to - the vaccine, and you're making it sound like one person's private decision to stay unvaccinated isn't explicitly affecting the health and safety of that person's friends and family and neighbors and colleagues. It's not like "my body, my choice", because one person's choice can affect other people's bodies, not to mention the fact that following the actual medical and scientific evidence brings us to a very clear decision: we ought to be vaccinated. Even though you're vaccinated, I can see plenty of anti-vaxxers / unvaccinated people making many of the same statements, trivializing how vital this vaccine has been - and continues to be - during our global pandemic. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
On July 30 2022 05:24 Artisreal wrote: What's your actual problem with them covid vaccines again? You're conflating so many points in time that it's hard to track what period of the pandemic you're talking about. The point is very simple and it hasn’t changed: people should make their healthcare decisions, particularly regarding what goes in their body, for themselves. By the way in case you didn’t know there are a few medications now authorized to treat COVID such as Paxlovid and monoclonal antibodies. Literally every argument used to justify why we should coerce people to take the vaccine could also be used to justify why we should coerce people to take Paxlovid. It prevents the severity of symptoms, likely making you less infectious and less of a burden on the taxpayers and healthcare system. The fact that the COVID vaccines don’t even function as traditional vaccines do ie they don’t grant you immunity and don’t stop you from getting COVID and spreading it to others makes this analogy even more apt. So that begs the question. Do you think we should coerce people to take Paxlovid if they are diagnosed with COVID? Maybe tell them they will be financially responsible for the excess burden they are placing on the system? You want to live in a world where people can tell you to open your mouth and swallow what they put in there? I’m sure you’ll tell me this is totally different and not the same at all before you go on to compare the COVID vaccines to seatbelts | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46279 Posts
On July 30 2022 06:53 BlackJack wrote: The point is very simple and it hasn’t changed: people should make their healthcare decisions, particularly regarding what goes in their body, for themselves. By the way in case you didn’t know there are a few medications now authorized to treat COVID such as Paxlovid and monoclonal antibodies. Literally every argument used to justify why we should coerce people to take the vaccine could also be used to justify why we should coerce people to take Paxlovid. It prevents the severity of symptoms, likely making you less infectious and less of a burden on the taxpayers and healthcare system. The fact that the COVID vaccines don’t even function as traditional vaccines do ie they don’t grant you immunity and don’t stop you from getting COVID and spreading it to others makes this analogy even more apt. Do you mean with 100% certainty and success? That's a ridiculously unfair standard. Plenty of vaccines don't guarantee perfection. The vaccine does lower the chance that you become infected, and even if you do get infected, you're far less likely to get seriously ill or die. Furthermore, of course being proactive (vaccination and not getting sick in the first place) is better than being reactive (medicine after getting sick). | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Mikau313
Netherlands230 Posts
On July 30 2022 05:18 BlackJack wrote: ...I’m clearly the only person that feels so supremely confident in my 3 shots to protect me that I don’t insist that everyone else around me also needs to be vaccinated in order for my 3 shots to work.... Carry on. The words you're looking for are "I don't understand how vaccines work". | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
On July 30 2022 06:53 BlackJack wrote: The point is very simple and it hasn’t changed: people should make their healthcare decisions, particularly regarding what goes in their body, for themselves. By the way in case you didn’t know there are a few medications now authorized to treat COVID such as Paxlovid and monoclonal antibodies. Literally every argument used to justify why we should coerce people to take the vaccine could also be used to justify why we should coerce people to take Paxlovid. It prevents the severity of symptoms, likely making you less infectious and less of a burden on the taxpayers and healthcare system. The fact that the COVID vaccines don’t even function as traditional vaccines do ie they don’t grant you immunity and don’t stop you from getting COVID and spreading it to others makes this analogy even more apt. So that begs the question. Do you think we should coerce people to take Paxlovid if they are diagnosed with COVID? Maybe tell them they will be financially responsible for the excess burden they are placing on the system? You want to live in a world where people can tell you to open your mouth and swallow what they put in there? I’m sure you’ll tell me this is totally different and not the same at all before you go on to compare the COVID vaccines to seatbelts This point is not so simple. If you're a danger to the public, you should be penalized, right? Personal responsibilty and such. Thus science said take the vacc to protect those more vulnerable (who despite being vacced are still susceptible) and those who get severely ill but have a chance to survive but die on the hospital floor because shit, beds are fulll already. ok. a couple more months in, lots of people vaccd, it's basically today. it's still 700 people a week that die of covid here currently. but the desease lost its threat, life goes on. the science also said that vaccs are not only good for preventing severe illness, but also help mitigate spread of the desease. thanks to that we're were we are with only so much mortality. do we still need vaccination? fuck yes. to stop the spread as each infection gives the virus room to mutate in a direction we won't like. Fuck, we're seeing summer waves now and people catching it outside, whereas alpha would previously have needed people to be in the same room for 15 minutes. Paxlovid or any other means used to treat patients with covid do not have the aforementoined benefits. I really fail to see any harm done to bodily autonomy by providing a wonderful means to protect yourself and your loved ones for free. it's weird that you still struggle with the fact that the vacc helps mitigate the spread. why is that? + Show Spoiler [CDC on covid spread] + COVID-19 vaccines currently approved or authorized in the United States have been shown to provide considerable protection against severe disease and death caused by COVID-19. These findings, along with the early evidence for reduced levels of viral mRNA and culturable virus in vaccinated people who acquire SARS-CoV-2 infection, suggest that any associated transmission risk is substantially reduced in vaccinated people: even for Delta, evidence suggests fully vaccinated people who become infected are infectious for shorter periods of time than unvaccinated people infected with Delta. While vaccine effectiveness against emerging and other SARS-CoV-2 variants will continue to be assessed, available evidence suggests that the COVID-19 vaccines approved or authorized in the United States offer substantial protection against hospitalization and death from emerging variants, including the Delta variant. Data suggest lower vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed illness and symptomatic disease caused by the Beta, Gamma, and Delta variants compared with the ancestral strain and Alpha variant. Early data also find some decline in vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection over time, although in fall 2021, 9 months after the start of the U.S. COVID-19 vaccination program, vaccination remains highly protective against hospitalization with COVID-19. re: not functioning as traditional vaccs. have you heard of the yearly flu vaccine? have you heard of the refresher vaccinations for tetanus, rabies, Polio, diphtheria, or whooping couch. oh and if you had measles, chances are your immune system "forgot" your immunity status for any obtained (temporary or permanent) immunity. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
On July 30 2022 06:56 JimmiC wrote: You called it a shitty vaccine.+ Show Spoiler + I find it funny that you chose to get it 3 times. People can have bought something and then be against it. You apparently like to get it but talk nonsense about it. Would you rather the people were morespecific and said you are actionlyprovax but verbally antivax. Isn't part of your schtick that everyone is too sensitive? For fucks sake. I’m sure you try your best with what you were given. Here’s that post again: On July 29 2022 17:39 BlackJack wrote: Either the vaccine offers you good protection or it doesn’t. If it does then you shouldn’t feel that threatened by the unvaccinated. If it doesn’t then you shouldn’t compel people to take a shitty vaccine. Maybe re-read that a few more times until it sinks in for you. It’s an either/or I’m proposing. Either the 1st sentence is true or the 2nd sentence is true. They can’t both be true. Either A or B. Now despite the fact that I didn’t proclaim which camp I belonged to (since I wanted others to ponder on it) it should be clear from my subsequent posts were I explicitly state I belong to camp A. A not B. Yet your big takeaway is “you called it a shitty vaccine” I understand this is an international forum and English may not be peoples first language but I don’t think that’s the case for you. Maybe stop replying to my posts because I can mostly ignore your stupidity I do feel compelled to set the record straight on occasion. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
On July 30 2022 07:35 Artisreal wrote: This point is not so simple. If you're a danger to the public, you should be penalized, right? Personal responsibilty and such. Thus science said take the vacc to protect those more vulnerable (who despite being vacced are still susceptible) and those who get severely ill but have a chance to survive but die on the hospital floor because shit, beds are fulll already. ok. a couple more months in, lots of people vaccd, it's basically today. it's still 700 people a week that die of covid here currently. but the desease lost its threat, life goes on. the science also said that vaccs are not only good for preventing severe illness, but also help mitigate spread of the desease. thanks to that we're were we are with only so much mortality. do we still need vaccination? fuck yes. to stop the spread as each infection gives the virus room to mutate in a direction we won't like. Fuck, we're seeing summer waves now and people catching it outside, whereas alpha would previously have needed people to be in the same room for 15 minutes. Paxlovid or any other means used to treat patients with covid do not have the aforementoined benefits. I really fail to see any harm done to bodily autonomy by providing a wonderful means to protect yourself and your loved ones for free. it's weird that you still struggle with the fact that the vacc helps mitigate the spread. why is that? + Show Spoiler [CDC on covid spread] + COVID-19 vaccines currently approved or authorized in the United States have been shown to provide considerable protection against severe disease and death caused by COVID-19. These findings, along with the early evidence for reduced levels of viral mRNA and culturable virus in vaccinated people who acquire SARS-CoV-2 infection, suggest that any associated transmission risk is substantially reduced in vaccinated people: even for Delta, evidence suggests fully vaccinated people who become infected are infectious for shorter periods of time than unvaccinated people infected with Delta. While vaccine effectiveness against emerging and other SARS-CoV-2 variants will continue to be assessed, available evidence suggests that the COVID-19 vaccines approved or authorized in the United States offer substantial protection against hospitalization and death from emerging variants, including the Delta variant. Data suggest lower vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed illness and symptomatic disease caused by the Beta, Gamma, and Delta variants compared with the ancestral strain and Alpha variant. Early data also find some decline in vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection over time, although in fall 2021, 9 months after the start of the U.S. COVID-19 vaccination program, vaccination remains highly protective against hospitalization with COVID-19. re: not functioning as traditional vaccs. have you heard of the yearly flu vaccine? have you heard of the refresher vaccinations for tetanus, rabies, Polio, diphtheria, or whooping couch. oh and if you had measles, chances are your immune system "forgot" your immunity status for any obtained (temporary or permanent) immunity. I think it’s not easily quantified to what extent vaccination reduces transmission but all signs seem to point to not very much. As I said previously Japan is very well vaccinated and they have been hitting 200,000 cases per day. In my area San Francisco Bay we have many counties of >90% with some vaccine coverage and we still went through a big wave with the worst rates in the state. Clearly some people in this thread are still buying into the 2020 pipe dream of herd immunity where we are perpetually just a few vaccines away of nobody dying of COVID. It’s simply not the case. “I really fail to see any harm done to bodily autonomy by providing a wonderful means to protect yourself and your loved ones for free.“ Yes, we are in complete agreement. Vaccines should be provided for free to everyone eligible. Of course I have no issue with your proposal. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On July 30 2022 04:57 BlackJack wrote: Okay enjoy living in your own version of reality. Not a single reputable scientist still believes “if everyone got the vaccine people wouldn’t still be dying of COVID.” You could split a hair into a full wig if you had enough time, couldn't you. I'm not saying that zero people would ever die of COVID if everybody got the vaccine. But it would be orders of magnitude less people dying, to the point where it's a minor statistic instead of a 1,000,000 people like it is now. And if everyone got the vaccine a year ago, transmissibility of the virus would have plummeted, and if not die off completely, it wouldn't have had the chance to mutate into Omicron and BA5 like it has. It would be over by now. Nobody would be dying anymore. We all know Trumpers and anti-vaxxers will never be reasoned with. But you're also saying the vaccine won't make a big difference. When it could change the world. That's the end of it. Stop arguing just to argue when you're wrong. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
Like, you got the vaccine early on. Good for you. But now because a shitload of people didn't also get the vaccine, the virus has now mutated enough times that it basically doesn't give a shit if you're vaccinated anymore. Congratulations, your principal of letting people get vaccinated only if they want to is paying off splendidly. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27266 Posts
On July 30 2022 09:16 NewSunshine wrote: It's likely I got infected in 2020, before we had vaccines. I got my two shots and booster as soon as I could, and just the other week got reinfected. I posted it in this thread before all this contrarian devil's advocate nonsense started up. Like, you got the vaccine early on. Good for you. But now because a shitload of people didn't also get the vaccine, the virus has now mutated enough times that it basically doesn't give a shit if you're vaccinated anymore. Congratulations, your principal of letting people get vaccinated only if they want to is paying off splendidly. It very much becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as the suboptimal uptake of vaccines at the time they could have made the biggest difference is held up as proof of their inefficacy. Ye cannae win like. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
Also considering how much less lethal omicron is to delta I’m not sure why the antivaxxers being solely responsible for the variants is supposed to be a knock on them. I’ll take a sore throat over a breathing tube any day. But I’m sure neither are as pleasant as believing In a 3rd option where nobody dies of covid. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
On July 30 2022 10:23 WombaT wrote: It very much becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as the suboptimal uptake of vaccines at the time they could have made the biggest difference is held up as proof of their inefficacy. Ye cannae win like. The more suboptimal uptake of vaccines occurred because we didn’t want to share them with the poor people. But I’m sure the coronavirus knows to only spread and mutate in the selfish assholes that are antivaxx and not in the unvaccinated people that just didn’t have access. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46279 Posts
On July 30 2022 08:35 BlackJack wrote: I think it’s not easily quantified to what extent vaccination reduces transmission but all signs seem to point to not very much. "A study2 of covid-19 transmission within English households using data gathered in early 2021 found that even a single dose of a covid-19 vaccine reduced the likelihood of household transmission by 40-50%. This was supported by a study of household transmission among Scottish healthcare workers conducted between December 2020 and March 2021.3 Both studies analysed the impact of vaccination on transmission of the α variant of SARS-CoV-2, which was dominant at the time." https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o298 I wouldn't consider cutting the transmission rate by half to be "not very much". | ||
| ||
