Parsad Posted March 25, 2021 Posted March 25, 2021 That's right. First, Fauci said there was no reason to be walking around with a mask. He didn't say, please save medical masks for health care professionals. He didn't say, please only use cloth masks. He didn't say that we have to initially prioritize healthcare workers. He said, there's no reason to be walking around with a mask. They may make you feel a bit better, but ... Then, the CDC made a mask recommendation. Then Fauci started recommending masks and gave the mask shortage explanation, which was different than the "no reason" rationale that he originally gave. Obviously, he now says that masks are useful. I.e., there is a reason to wear masks. His statements definitely changed. The quotes speak for themselves. Some people suggest that Fauci was being dishonest at first to preserve masks for healthcare workers. Maybe so. But, if so, when am I supposed to take Dr. Fauci at his word and when should I assume he is lying. Wasn't Fauci specifically guided by the administration to play down Covid? And if people don't want to believe Fauci, how about every other health minister in every other developed country tackling the problem? Cheers!
wachtwoord Posted March 25, 2021 Posted March 25, 2021 Hi Wachtword, Assume you are 100% correct. Negate the argument on levels of immunity...just ignore it for now. Are you going to say that the health system in most countries right now aren't overwhelmed by Covid cases, and indirectly taking an effect on non-Covid cases? I have an uncle on life support right now, because two days ago, he fell off the commode next to his bed in intensive care after a heart attack, hit his head, and no one found him for over an hour. He actually died and they brought him back a couple of times. The hospital where he is at is completely overwhelmed with Covid cases, as is most of Canada's healthcare system, and that is affecting the care of other patients. On top of that, my aunt...the only family member allowed to see him...is only allowed to visit her husband for two hours, twice a week! We've also had millions and millions of people inoculated now with three different well-known vaccines. There are some side effects from one, with a 1 in 1000 occurrence of blood clots. The other two have had fewer side effects and complications. Are you suggesting that the vaccine poses a greater risk at that level of occurrence (1/1000), compared to immunizing the bulk of the population where death from Covid is around the 0.5/100 incidents? Cheers! Yes the healthcare system is overwhelmed. But not due to Covid-19 but due to human choices. Here in Europe at least last year they postponed all they classified as "non-essential" for many months. They included many cancer treatments and cancer checkups/studies among other things! I (and also doctors I have spoken too) would qualify that as criminal. Clearly the wrong choice was made and Covid-patients should just been send home to recover (or, unfortunately in some cases, die). Putting so many on ventilators was a bad call (and most of the permanent damage was done by these ventilators!) The choice was political: no politician can be criminally prosecuted for people dying of cancer but if people judges you mishandled a pandemic? .... Also no-one wants to be the harbinger of bad news (people will die, nothing we can do). They prefer to take action to try and stop it, even if that action is worse than inaction ("at least he did something") Your comment regarding only your aunt being allowed to see him. I agree that's completely heartbreaking. I heard of many old people dying alone who just wanted to be with their family members when they died. Again: I would classify it as criminal this was denied. But that is an argument against the Corona measures (the reason this happened) NOT Corona. Without the measures visits would only be restricted by the visitation hours of the hospital or senior citizen home. With all due respect: do you think you have ANY clue regarding side effects at this point? Regarding the individual we know there don't appear to be a great many immediate side effects. That is all we know. I'm not saying there will be terrible side effects: I don't know. But I think you are making a logical error here in assuming chances for that are so incredibly low. You are also using wrong numbers: I do not have 0.5/100 death chance. I would argue significantly lower than 1 in 1 million. (1 in 10 million seems the right order of magnitude for myself given the data). Regarding the effect to the population you are blindly assuming it to be positive. 1. As far as I've seen there is (as of yet) no evidence those inoculated no longer carry and spread the virus (please point me to a source if this has changed?) 2. As I wrote earlier that apparently it's immunology 101 to NOT vaccinate during an active outbreak as this will risk making the virus more dangerous. You wait until the outbreak dies down and start the vaccination scheme afterwards. Why isn't that game plan followed today? Why take the risk to make the virus actually dangerous? (with actually I mean more than influenza, which society has learned to accept as a part of life). I'm afraid the answer can be again found in political reasons (inaction is punished in society while action is rewarded, even if inaction is superior) Perhaps the reason for your opinion is that you fell for mental shortcuts? In most of your life those refusing to vaccinate do so for illogical reasons (claiming it gives them autism or something equally unlikely) and now you think that is the case again. Taking the mental shortcut that those refusing to vaccinate are simply dumb/uneducated. I would argue circumstances are very different here and therefore require a different response. I am not against vaccines. I'm against these specific vaccines at this specific point in time (and for myself likely at any point and time, as long as the virus is relatively harmless to me) based on the information I have available today.
wachtwoord Posted March 25, 2021 Posted March 25, 2021 Type "Covid variants young people" in Google and you will find tens of articles discussing how some new variants are making young people sicker and even increasing mortality rates. Cheers! Cool, now try doing the same with "the earth is flat" and "5g kills".
Parsad Posted March 25, 2021 Posted March 25, 2021 With all due respect: do you think you have ANY clue regarding side effects at this point? Regarding the individual we know there don't appear to be a great many immediate side effects. That is all we know. I'm not saying there will be terrible side effects: I don't know. But I think you are making a logical error here in assuming chances for that are so incredibly low. You are also using wrong numbers: I do not have 0.5/100 death chance. I would argue significantly lower than 1 in 1 million. (1 in 10 million seems the right order of magnitude for myself given the data). There are tens of articles, from media and scientific journals, estimating the mortality rate of Covid is around 0.6-0.7% with data backing up those conclusions...I gave you the benefit of the doubt and said 0.5%. How the heck do you get 1 in 10 million...is that conjecture, or do you have any ACTUAL data that supports that?! Regarding the effect to the population you are blindly assuming it to be positive. 1. As far as I've seen there is (as of yet) no evidence those inoculated no longer carry and spread the virus (please point me to a source if this has changed?) 2. As I wrote earlier that apparently it's immunology 101 to NOT vaccinate during an active outbreak as this will risk making the virus more dangerous. You wait until the outbreak dies down and start the vaccination scheme afterwards. Why isn't that game plan followed today? Why take the risk to make the virus actually dangerous? (with actually I mean more than influenza, which society has learned to accept as a part of life). I'm afraid the answer can be again found in political reasons (inaction is punished in society while action is rewarded, even if inaction is superior) 1. No that is correct. But if you are inoculated, you have less than a 10% chance of contracting the virus. Israel is nearly 100% vaccinated. Take a look at the daily stats trajectory since they started inoculations in December. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/israel/ 2. Sorry to tell you, that's not immunology 101...not sure where you got that from. Perhaps the reason for your opinion is that you fell for mental shortcuts? In most of your life those refusing to vaccinate do so for illogical reasons (claiming it gives them autism or something equally unlikely) and now you think that is the case again. Taking the mental shortcut that those refusing to vaccinate are simply dumb/uneducated. I would argue circumstances are very different here and therefore require a different response. I'm actually providing you numbers. I have not seen any numbers backing your theories. Cheers!
Parsad Posted March 25, 2021 Posted March 25, 2021 Type "Covid variants young people" in Google and you will find tens of articles discussing how some new variants are making young people sicker and even increasing mortality rates. Cheers! Cool, now try doing the same with "the earth is flat" and "5g kills". Stop being facetious! I'm not asking you to read any article...pick and chose the sources you feel comfortable with from all of those articles...whether it's the Harvard Medical Journal, World Health Organization, The Lancet, Vancouver Sun, Washington Post, any global news outlet or source...whatever you want. Cheers!
StevieV Posted March 25, 2021 Posted March 25, 2021 That's right. First, Fauci said there was no reason to be walking around with a mask. He didn't say, please save medical masks for health care professionals. He didn't say, please only use cloth masks. He didn't say that we have to initially prioritize healthcare workers. He said, there's no reason to be walking around with a mask. They may make you feel a bit better, but ... Then, the CDC made a mask recommendation. Then Fauci started recommending masks and gave the mask shortage explanation, which was different than the "no reason" rationale that he originally gave. Obviously, he now says that masks are useful. I.e., there is a reason to wear masks. His statements definitely changed. The quotes speak for themselves. Some people suggest that Fauci was being dishonest at first to preserve masks for healthcare workers. Maybe so. But, if so, when am I supposed to take Dr. Fauci at his word and when should I assume he is lying. Wasn't Fauci specifically guided by the administration to play down Covid? And if people don't want to believe Fauci, how about every other health minister in every other developed country tackling the problem? Cheers! As I said upthread, I think there is good reason to be skeptical of health officials. They are subject to the influences of money, power, politics, condescension and plain old mistakes, and they've been wrong plenty. I don't dismiss what health officials and organizations say, but nor do I simply accept whatever they say without question. I think they've given people plenty of reason to view their pronouncements with at least a certain amount of skepticism.
Gregmal Posted March 25, 2021 Posted March 25, 2021 To be fair though, I dont think there are many folks more guilty of undermining public confidence in a vaccine than the two folks currently holding the title President and VP, along with a lot of their friends and allies. At the end of the day, everyone needs to make an assessment for themselves and thats all there is to it. I never got a flu shot until I had kids. Certain things, much like trades or investments, set themselves up differently to everyone. I just dont see the merit in making ones decision on anything a public figurehead says, or even on the supposed "wellbeing of strangers"...is it fair to me my income gets ransacked because poor people cant get it together, or because my governor who I didnt vote for and dont support wants to push bogus programs I want nothing to do with? Maybe they should be more considerate too! Right? Nope, thats not how the world works. Take care of yourself and your loved ones. Do everything you can for them and everyone else, in one context or another, can fuck off or learn to do the same. I'll let this comment be my last here as I already feel like this is wading into politics and I dont really care all that much, like I stated earlier. I got the vaccine because it was important to the people who's opinions I value. And thats it for me. Every should have their own say.
Spekulatius Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 The system in MA here sucks, but what really sucks is Europe. My parents are 79 and 84 and no visibility on when to get the vaccine. You should not generalize across Europe. In Lithuania anyone above 70 can get vaccine already and possibly even above 65. To be fair, Lithuania is still way behind US. There is a difference between “you can sign up to get the vaccine” and actually getting it. My dad is in the highest priority group due to age, yet can’t effectively get the vaccine at this point. The reasons are simple, lack of vaccine and lack of effective distribution. I probably could manage this for him if I were around, but from a distance across the ocean and not being intimately familiar with the process there, I can’t help him much. The mistake that the state bureaucracy does (imo) is not allow the primary physicians to give a vaccine shots. They could easily do it, but the bureaucracy has decided that a centralized distribution via mass vac sites is fairer, except for the fact that older people without internet and car effectively can’t get it done. The whole village were I grew up (1100 people, pretty rural) is full of old people and very few of them are vaccinated. Of course every country is different but that’s the situation on the ground in Germany pertaining to my dad.
wachtwoord Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 With all due respect: do you think you have ANY clue regarding side effects at this point? Regarding the individual we know there don't appear to be a great many immediate side effects. That is all we know. I'm not saying there will be terrible side effects: I don't know. But I think you are making a logical error here in assuming chances for that are so incredibly low. You are also using wrong numbers: I do not have 0.5/100 death chance. I would argue significantly lower than 1 in 1 million. (1 in 10 million seems the right order of magnitude for myself given the data). There are tens of articles, from media and scientific journals, estimating the mortality rate of Covid is around 0.6-0.7% with data backing up those conclusions...I gave you the benefit of the doubt and said 0.5%. How the heck do you get 1 in 10 million...is that conjecture, or do you have any ACTUAL data that supports that?! First Google hit: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1111779/coronavirus-death-rate-europe-by-country/ Worst European country is Czech republic with 233 deaths per 100,000 population. That is 0.23%. Want a more average case? How about Germany with 90 per 100,000: 0.09% US lies between those two with 0.16% (according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_death_rates_by_country) That same source has Canada at 61 per 100,000: 0.06% Those are far lower numbers than 0.5% already. On top of that, those percentages are for the entire population! Older people are the vast majority of those deaths. Let's take the US (not to cherry-pick). If we take https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/06/23/coronavirus-covid-deaths-us-age-race-14863 for example that shows that 1.7% of the deaths in the US concerns someone under 44. 0.017*0.0016 = 0.0000272, so an average American under 44 has 0.00272% chance of dying from Covid -19 (about 1 in 36,765) And I didn't even filter out the morbidly obese and those with lung disease, those with compromised immune systems etc yet! To be able to calculate further I'll assume filtering that out lowers the factor by another factor 50-100 (same factor as the age filter, no uncorrelated data is available). Leading to a chance to die of Corona for an average healthy American of between 1 in 1.8M and 1 in 3.6M That's comparable to the chance that an average commercial airplane flight results in a fatality (estimation by aviation consulting firm To70 see https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/02/fatalities-on-commercial-passenger-aircraft-rise-in-2018.html): 1 in 3M So who's being facetious? Or are you also scared of flying? The chance of death is remote and the only thing happening is fear mongering.
Parsad Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 With all due respect: do you think you have ANY clue regarding side effects at this point? Regarding the individual we know there don't appear to be a great many immediate side effects. That is all we know. I'm not saying there will be terrible side effects: I don't know. But I think you are making a logical error here in assuming chances for that are so incredibly low. You are also using wrong numbers: I do not have 0.5/100 death chance. I would argue significantly lower than 1 in 1 million. (1 in 10 million seems the right order of magnitude for myself given the data). There are tens of articles, from media and scientific journals, estimating the mortality rate of Covid is around 0.6-0.7% with data backing up those conclusions...I gave you the benefit of the doubt and said 0.5%. How the heck do you get 1 in 10 million...is that conjecture, or do you have any ACTUAL data that supports that?! First Google hit: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1111779/coronavirus-death-rate-europe-by-country/ Worst European country is Czech republic with 233 deaths per 100,000 population. That is 0.23%. Want a more average case? How about Germany with 90 per 100,000: 0.09% US lies between those two with 0.16% (according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_death_rates_by_country) That same source has Canada at 61 per 100,000: 0.06% Those are far lower numbers than 0.5% already. On top of that, those percentages are for the entire population! Older people are the vast majority of those deaths. Let's take the US (not to cherry-pick). If we take https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/06/23/coronavirus-covid-deaths-us-age-race-14863 for example that shows that 1.7% of the deaths in the US concerns someone under 44. 0.017*0.0016 = 0.0000272, so an average American under 44 has 0.00272% chance of dying from Covid -19 (about 1 in 36,765) And I didn't even filter out the morbidly obese and those with lung disease, those with compromised immune systems etc yet! To be able to calculate further I'll assume filtering that out lowers the factor by another factor 50-100 (same factor as the age filter, no uncorrelated data is available). Leading to a chance to die of Corona for an average healthy American of between 1 in 1.8M and 1 in 3.6M That's comparable to the chance that an average commercial airplane flight results in a fatality (estimation by aviation consulting firm To70 see https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/02/fatalities-on-commercial-passenger-aircraft-rise-in-2018.html): 1 in 3M So who's being facetious? Or are you also scared of flying? The chance of death is remote and the only thing happening is fear mongering. Your assuming that everyone has been infected by using the deaths per 100,000 number. In Canada, it shows 22K people died out of roughly 1M people infected. You cannot divide the 22K by the population of the country and assume that is the mortality rate. That's ridiculous! Even if you assume that 5 times as many people had Covid and recovered, you still have a mortality rate of 440 out of every 100,000 people. And I'm being generous in assuming that 5M people have been infected out of Canada's 32M population. This is just basic math! Cheers!
wachtwoord Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 With all due respect: do you think you have ANY clue regarding side effects at this point? Regarding the individual we know there don't appear to be a great many immediate side effects. That is all we know. I'm not saying there will be terrible side effects: I don't know. But I think you are making a logical error here in assuming chances for that are so incredibly low. You are also using wrong numbers: I do not have 0.5/100 death chance. I would argue significantly lower than 1 in 1 million. (1 in 10 million seems the right order of magnitude for myself given the data). There are tens of articles, from media and scientific journals, estimating the mortality rate of Covid is around 0.6-0.7% with data backing up those conclusions...I gave you the benefit of the doubt and said 0.5%. How the heck do you get 1 in 10 million...is that conjecture, or do you have any ACTUAL data that supports that?! First Google hit: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1111779/coronavirus-death-rate-europe-by-country/ Worst European country is Czech republic with 233 deaths per 100,000 population. That is 0.23%. Want a more average case? How about Germany with 90 per 100,000: 0.09% US lies between those two with 0.16% (according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_death_rates_by_country) That same source has Canada at 61 per 100,000: 0.06% Those are far lower numbers than 0.5% already. On top of that, those percentages are for the entire population! Older people are the vast majority of those deaths. Let's take the US (not to cherry-pick). If we take https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/06/23/coronavirus-covid-deaths-us-age-race-14863 for example that shows that 1.7% of the deaths in the US concerns someone under 44. 0.017*0.0016 = 0.0000272, so an average American under 44 has 0.00272% chance of dying from Covid -19 (about 1 in 36,765) And I didn't even filter out the morbidly obese and those with lung disease, those with compromised immune systems etc yet! To be able to calculate further I'll assume filtering that out lowers the factor by another factor 50-100 (same factor as the age filter, no uncorrelated data is available). Leading to a chance to die of Corona for an average healthy American of between 1 in 1.8M and 1 in 3.6M That's comparable to the chance that an average commercial airplane flight results in a fatality (estimation by aviation consulting firm To70 see https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/02/fatalities-on-commercial-passenger-aircraft-rise-in-2018.html): 1 in 3M So who's being facetious? Or are you also scared of flying? The chance of death is remote and the only thing happening is fear mongering. Your assuming that everyone has been infected by using the deaths per 100,000 number. In Canada, it shows 22K people died out of roughly 1M people infected. You cannot divide the 22K by the population of the country and assume that is the mortality rate. That's ridiculous! Even if you assume that 5 times as many people had Covid and recovered, you still have a mortality rate of 440 out of every 100,000 people. And I'm being generous in assuming that 5M people have been infected out of Canada's 32M population. This is just basic math! Cheers! What are you suggesting? Using an inflated denominator (people dying from something else were counted as covid death) and understated divisor (many people had Covid without knowing it)? Further you are assuming everyone WILL be infected. Covid has been spread worldwide for over a year now, using recorded deaths divided by total population is a reasonable way to estimate death rate. Certainly more reasonable than what you are suggesting we use! And indeed the 22000 Canadians that died. Ridiculously low amount of deaths to sacrifice the freedoms and livelihoods of so many wouldn't you say?
fareastwarriors Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 Y'all back at it again like in the Coronavirus thread? Don't you guys get tired? I'm just here for the free donuts.
wachtwoord Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 Gotta bring back the politics section for y’all ;) If this topic wasn't political I wouldn't be interested. Just like I'm not reading topics about the flu, common cold or hay fever. The fact that it's politicized is why it effect me (and probably almost everyone)
AzCactus Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 "It’s seriously not that hard to understand what happened if you aren’t trying to play the gotcha game." -How about we agree on this: Those who get the vaccine - GOOD LUCK TO YOU! Your choice. Those who don't get the vaccine - GOOD LUCK TO YOU! Your choice. Sound ok? Cheers. Hi SouthernYankee, please don't take any offense. That argument would be ok if your choice in not taking the vaccine had no impact on others...say like getting a stent put in or not, because you have a clogged artery, or not getting chemo because you have cancer. But this is far more impactful and detrimental than even second hand smoke in how you affect others around you...unless you stay in your home locked up and never seen anyone again. I think that is the main point anyone in favor of inoculation is making...not the statistics, politics, etc. Simply that the more people vaccinated, the less likely vulnerable people will die from Covid by being exposes to others. And we've seen how variants are affecting younger, healthier people...so it is no longer just the old and immune compromised anymore. Cheers! Agree with Southern Yankee. The stats generally point to older folks (65+) or those with pre-existing conditions being the most vulnerable. It may sound selfish but if you are vulnerable the onus is on you to protect yourself. The overwhelming majority of young people recover pretty quickly (less than 2 weeks from Covid). In the US a country of about 320 million (fairly large sample size) only 8000 people under 40 have died according to the CDC. The covid vaccine was rushed to market for obvious reasons and nobody can be sure what effects if any might exist long term. If there was more science/data to support getting the vaccine I probably would. However, when the average FDA approval takes 4-8 years depending on the source to reach stage 4, I think I have a right (maybe an obligation) to be skeptical of a vaccine that went through all the steps in under a year. Stay safe and healthy--your body, your choice. Generally vaccines take that long because of limited dollars and extensive volume trials. But this was a pandemic and they essentially threw unlimited resources at it and fast-tracked emergency approval guidelines on clinical trials. In other words, the possible side effects and risks, were outweighed by the risks and deaths from not using the vaccine against Covid. You now actually have far more data, which has been extensively analyzed by experts around the world, than any trial would provide...and the results are the vaccines are effective and have limited side effects. Regarding age...some of the new variants are having a greater impact on those between 30-50, including higher mortality. So just because one variant affected older and immune compromised patients dramatically, doesn't mean a new variant could not pose a threat to the healthy and younger subgroups. And we know that the current vaccines are having some protective effect against some variants. Will that last...we don't know...but so far it is working. Cheers! Regarding the vaccine and side effects...in the short term sure you may well be right. In the long term we have no idea because the vaccine has not been used that long. Regarding age....no idea where you are getting those figures from. The deaths quoted above are directly from the CDC. Also, I find it unlikely that a new variant would do more hard to younger people with stronger immune systems than older people. In the US, doing the rough math 8000 deaths in the age bracket cited above while tragic comes out to about 22 people under 40 per day. Hardly worth rushing to get a new vaccine in my opinion. Type "Covid variants young people" in Google and you will find tens of articles discussing how some new variants are making young people sicker and even increasing mortality rates. Cheers! I did as you suggested and looked that up. Really saw articles saying what "could" happen. The reality which is what we know is that based on the facts younger people are basically not dying here. This is like someone suggesting a stock and saying google "buy name of company". Again, I say lets look at the reality-22 people a day in the United States---very sad but hardly an extraordinary number.
LC Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 Gotta bring back the politics section for y’all ;) If this topic wasn't political I wouldn't be interested. Just like I'm not reading topics about the flu, common cold or hay fever. The fact that it's politicized is why it effect me (and probably almost everyone) It affects most people because millions have died.
wachtwoord Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 Gotta bring back the politics section for y’all ;) If this topic wasn't political I wouldn't be interested. Just like I'm not reading topics about the flu, common cold or hay fever. The fact that it's politicized is why it effect me (and probably almost everyone) It affects most people because millions have died. Lol no millions is not so many. Most definitely not most (world population is billions). It affects most people due to what has happened to basic rights in just a year. How little respect hss been shown to constitutions. THAT is how it affects most people.
Gregmal Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 I'd say it effects most people because folks have been told to stay locked in their homes. Folks have had their businesses shut down while still being required to pay property and business taxes. Folks have been fined for trying to work out at a gym. Folks have been given citations for walking alone on a beach. Folks have been told they arent allowed to travel or leave the state. Folks have been unable to buy basic food or groceries at various points. Folks have been forced to beg for stimulus money.... And personally in my case, Ive been in a state thats part of a region that has fucked things up so badly and financially slit its own wrists and keeps doubling down on this failure and now their solution is to further pick my pocket to pay for the things they claim they need to do in order to get out of the mess they and only they were so adamant about creating.
RichardGibbons Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 Covid has been spread worldwide for over a year now, using recorded deaths divided by total population is a reasonable way to estimate death rate. I think you can equally use this argument against gun control. Guns have been around for even longer than a year. And in 2015, about 13,286 died as a result of being shot, so certainly not more than 13,286 people died of being shot in the head. And there are about 330M people in the USA. Therefore, if you're shot in the head, you have less than a 0.004% chance of dying. There's basically almost no chance of dying if you're shot in the head.
SouthernYankee Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 As someone who has been shot in the last year, but in the same time avoided this virus (I think, may go for the anti-body test to double-check), I still think the best response to the question of this thread is: Those who get the vaccine - GOOD LUCK TO YOU! Your choice. Those who don't get the vaccine - GOOD LUCK TO YOU! Your choice. Funny part about all the people responding - we ALL try to limit the taxes we pay! Cheers!
AzCactus Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 As someone who has been shot in the last year, but in the same time avoided this virus (I think, may go for the anti-body test to double-check), I still think the best response to the question of this thread is: Those who get the vaccine - GOOD LUCK TO YOU! Your choice. Those who don't get the vaccine - GOOD LUCK TO YOU! Your choice. Funny part about all the people responding - we ALL try to limit the taxes we pay! Cheers! Yes Southern Yankee is on one
Investor20 Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 ‘Leaky’ Vaccines Can Produce Stronger Versions of Viruses https://www.healthline.com/health-news/leaky-vaccines-can-produce-stronger-versions-of-viruses-072715 Updated on April 5, 2019 By studying chickens, researchers say they have proven the theory that more virulent viruses can evolve from so-called “leaky” vaccines. “When a vaccine works perfectly, as do the childhood vaccines for smallpox, polio, mumps, rubella and measles, it prevents vaccinated individuals from being sickened by the disease, and it also prevents them from transmitting the virus to others,” ...... 'Leaky' Vaccines May Fuel Evolution of Deadlier Viruses https://www.livescience.com/51682-vaccines-evolve-deadlier-viruses.html July 29, 2015
Parsad Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 Covid has been spread worldwide for over a year now, using recorded deaths divided by total population is a reasonable way to estimate death rate. I think you can equally use this argument against gun control. Guns have been around for even longer than a year. And in 2015, about 13,286 died as a result of being shot, so certainly not more than 13,286 people died of being shot in the head. And there are about 330M people in the USA. Therefore, if you're shot in the head, you have less than a 0.004% chance of dying. There's basically almost no chance of dying if you're shot in the head. Thanks! I need that! Cheers!
Parsad Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 "It’s seriously not that hard to understand what happened if you aren’t trying to play the gotcha game." -How about we agree on this: Those who get the vaccine - GOOD LUCK TO YOU! Your choice. Those who don't get the vaccine - GOOD LUCK TO YOU! Your choice. Sound ok? Cheers. Hi SouthernYankee, please don't take any offense. That argument would be ok if your choice in not taking the vaccine had no impact on others...say like getting a stent put in or not, because you have a clogged artery, or not getting chemo because you have cancer. But this is far more impactful and detrimental than even second hand smoke in how you affect others around you...unless you stay in your home locked up and never seen anyone again. I think that is the main point anyone in favor of inoculation is making...not the statistics, politics, etc. Simply that the more people vaccinated, the less likely vulnerable people will die from Covid by being exposes to others. And we've seen how variants are affecting younger, healthier people...so it is no longer just the old and immune compromised anymore. Cheers! Agree with Southern Yankee. The stats generally point to older folks (65+) or those with pre-existing conditions being the most vulnerable. It may sound selfish but if you are vulnerable the onus is on you to protect yourself. The overwhelming majority of young people recover pretty quickly (less than 2 weeks from Covid). In the US a country of about 320 million (fairly large sample size) only 8000 people under 40 have died according to the CDC. The covid vaccine was rushed to market for obvious reasons and nobody can be sure what effects if any might exist long term. If there was more science/data to support getting the vaccine I probably would. However, when the average FDA approval takes 4-8 years depending on the source to reach stage 4, I think I have a right (maybe an obligation) to be skeptical of a vaccine that went through all the steps in under a year. Stay safe and healthy--your body, your choice. Generally vaccines take that long because of limited dollars and extensive volume trials. But this was a pandemic and they essentially threw unlimited resources at it and fast-tracked emergency approval guidelines on clinical trials. In other words, the possible side effects and risks, were outweighed by the risks and deaths from not using the vaccine against Covid. You now actually have far more data, which has been extensively analyzed by experts around the world, than any trial would provide...and the results are the vaccines are effective and have limited side effects. Regarding age...some of the new variants are having a greater impact on those between 30-50, including higher mortality. So just because one variant affected older and immune compromised patients dramatically, doesn't mean a new variant could not pose a threat to the healthy and younger subgroups. And we know that the current vaccines are having some protective effect against some variants. Will that last...we don't know...but so far it is working. Cheers! Regarding the vaccine and side effects...in the short term sure you may well be right. In the long term we have no idea because the vaccine has not been used that long. Regarding age....no idea where you are getting those figures from. The deaths quoted above are directly from the CDC. Also, I find it unlikely that a new variant would do more hard to younger people with stronger immune systems than older people. In the US, doing the rough math 8000 deaths in the age bracket cited above while tragic comes out to about 22 people under 40 per day. Hardly worth rushing to get a new vaccine in my opinion. Type "Covid variants young people" in Google and you will find tens of articles discussing how some new variants are making young people sicker and even increasing mortality rates. Cheers! I did as you suggested and looked that up. Really saw articles saying what "could" happen. The reality which is what we know is that based on the facts younger people are basically not dying here. This is like someone suggesting a stock and saying google "buy name of company". Again, I say lets look at the reality-22 people a day in the United States---very sad but hardly an extraordinary number. https://www.wsj.com/articles/coronavirus-variant-in-u-k-probed-for-increased-risk-to-younger-people-11611661304 https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/12/data-reveal-deadliness-covid-19-even-young-adults https://interestingengineering.com/uk-study-shows-new-covid-19-variant-spreads-faster-affects-younger-people https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/2/15/uk-study-finds-kent-variant-may-be-70-more-deadly Just a few found in minutes. Cheers!
Investor20 Posted March 26, 2021 Posted March 26, 2021 Covid has been spread worldwide for over a year now, using recorded deaths divided by total population is a reasonable way to estimate death rate. I think you can equally use this argument against gun control. Guns have been around for even longer than a year. And in 2015, about 13,286 died as a result of being shot, so certainly not more than 13,286 people died of being shot in the head. And there are about 330M people in the USA. Therefore, if you're shot in the head, you have less than a 0.004% chance of dying. There's basically almost no chance of dying if you're shot in the head. Thanks! I need that! Cheers! The way I understood the comment is following way: 10 million per year die of cancer deaths every year 2.6 million died of Covid since its start. Yet the policies are such that we reduced cancer screenings by order of 80% "During California’s stay-at-home order, cervical cancer screening rates among approximately 1.5 million women in the Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) network decreased approximately 80% compared with baseline. " https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7004a1.htm According to Dr. Jay Bhattacharya at Stanford, we will be paying this price for decades to come, not just cancer screenings but diabetes, hypertension, reduced vaccination of children, etc. https://www.newsweek.com/jay-bhattacharya-stanford-doctor-says-reversing-covid-lockdown-damage-will-take-generation-1575522 Jay Bhattacharya, Stanford Doctor, Says Reversing COVID Lockdown Damage Will 'Take a Generation'
Recommended Posts