Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[scottsdad]

P&B adverts....

[welshbairn]

21 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

Lots of people do lots of legal activities that put others at some degree of risk every single day. The issue is that this normalises introducing some sort of moral code into our society, where the government of the day can deem some property or other to be undesirable or dangerous and then to exclude them from society on that basis.

Every society has a moral code that governs behaviour.

Edited November 12, 2021 by welshbairn

[anotherchance]

6 hours ago, Bairnardo said:

Covid: Austrians heading towards lockdown for unvaccinated - BBC News

 

Good grief man.....

Fritzl was Austrian wasn’t he?

Remember he had similar views about locking people up and destroying their lives if they didn’t do what he wanted them to do with their bodies.

[craigkillie]

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

Every society has a moral code that governs behaviour.

We have laws that govern behaviour, and none of those laws have previously restricted people's activities based on their medical or health decisions (bad or good).

[AsimButtHitsASix]

1 hour ago, virginton said:

If people cannot rationally adapt to the changing degree of personal risk that vaccines bring by now then that's their own problem. There's always The Guardian comments section and Devi Sridhar's timeline to occupy their time waiting for an endemic cold virus to go away. 

This would be a good argument if people weren't rationally adapting to the changing degree of personal risk. This is why disabled people are still dying in horrifying rates. So if we expect people to go about their daily lives as best they can knowing they are more at risk or death or illness then those who seek to endanger them further through wilful ignorance can stay the f**k at home and lessen that risk. 

[Suspect Device]

Looks like the Netherlands are heading for a 'partial lockdown' to control the rise in cases despite having a fairly high vaccine rate.

 

Netherlands announces partial lockdown as Covid-19 rates across Europe soar (telegraph.co.uk)

 

Edited November 12, 2021 by Suspect Device

[Lyle Lanley]

2 hours ago, scottsdad said:

P&B adverts....

When did Devi become a p&b moderator. 

Edited November 12, 2021 by Lyle Lanley

[Lofarl]

4 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Austria have ways of making you vaccinate.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-vienna-brothel-offers-customers-30-minutes-with-lady-of-their-choice-in-exchange-for-coronavirus-jab-12464616

Right you’ll just feel a little p***k.

 

Oh vaccinated are you?

[MONKMAN]

2 hours ago, scottsdad said:

Take for instance the example that someone has batshit crazy beliefs about the vaccine. The whole Bill Gates, microchip, 5G, Piers Corbyn, Lawrence Fox, Great Reset nonsense. If that person refuses the vaccine and therefore has their employment terminated, can't a case be made that they have been sacked because of their beliefs? Fairly sure that there is a legal challenge in here somewhere. 

Never mind their employment, anyone believing that pish should be terminated from existence.

[Ron Aldo]

Looks like the Netherlands are heading for a 'partial lockdown' to control the rise in cases despite having a fairly high vaccine rate.
 
Netherlands announces partial lockdown as Covid-19 rates across Europe soar (telegraph.co.uk)
 

I'm sure this will instill confidence in the vaccination programme.

[Michael W]

33 minutes ago, Ron Aldo said:

1 hour ago, Suspect Device said:

Looks like the Netherlands are heading for a 'partial lockdown' to control the rise in cases despite having a fairly high vaccine rate.
 
Netherlands announces partial lockdown as Covid-19 rates across Europe soar (telegraph.co.uk)
 

I'm sure this will instill confidence in the vaccination programme.

Quite. 

The shifty goalposts have probably done enough as it is: vaccinate the JCVI priority groups became all adults, which became over 16s which then became over 12s. Now there's rumblings about over 5s and the US for one is pressing ahead with that. 

I will be shocked if the booster programme isn't subsequently changed to encompass all adults. I was delighted to get vaccinated, but to be quite frank I am starting to feel that I've been conned. We were promised this was the route back to normality and here we are again: Europe is starting lock down again and that'll be the pressure being cranked up here too from the usual suspects.

At this stage, the vast majority over the age of 18 in Europe who aren't vaccinated have decided they don't want it. A lot of the younger ones will have determined they are unlikely to get seriously ill and therefore won't bother, some will have reservations about it for any number of reasons and others will be the usual 5G type lunatics.

What they will all see is a country with 75% of the vaccine eligible population going back into lockdown and will deduce that the vaccines don't work. Getting belligerent with them and telling them they are the reason (and they are in a minority of the population here) the country is having to lockdown again isn't going to wash. They can also point out that the vaccine passport hasn't worked, that being vaccinated doesn't stop you getting it, so will again wonder what the point in vaccination is. We need to stop obsessing on case numbers - perhaps we publish two metric: hospitalisations (including ICU) and deaths, with a vaccinated/unvaccinated split.

We are in firmly dangerous territory with Austria's scapegoating of the unvavcinated so it's worth keeping an eye on how that develops. I am not convinced societal exclusion and bullying is going to work, it may not lead to much beyond some placard waving and cheating, but I don't think this is going to have the results that the Austrians think it will.

 

 

Edited November 12, 2021 by Michael W

[LongTimeLurker]

3 hours ago, Bairnardo said:

People being comfortable with a precedent set whereby the Govt of the day can limit your participation in society based on your willingness to medicate yourself, whether or not you are at any credible risk from the disease/virus you are being medicated against just has me absolutely and totally baffled. 

Life isn't always all about the individual. There's a reason that polio and smallpox were mandatory vaccines. It was possible to eradicate those diseases as a problem for anyone because the vaccines work so well. Unfortunately the COVID-19 shots are not as effective as that. A balance has to be struck between individual freedoms and protecting society in general. In addition to having freedoms we also have responsibilities and in contrast to what Maggie T claimed there is such a thing as society.

[Detournement]

3 hours ago, AsimButtHitsASix said:

It's because whether you, me or anyone else, is at credible risk of harm from the disease we are all credible risk of passing it onto others.

Either the unvaccinated have their participation in society limited to protect others from harm, and they get to make that choice, or those with underlying conditions, who have no choice in the matter, have to decrease their own participation. It's a no brainer for me. Despite making up a small percentage of the population almost two thirds of covid deaths have affected the disabled. I can't fathom why disabled people, older people or people with respiratory issues should be forced to remain at home just because some flump who failed spud science thinks he knows how vaccines work better than scientists. 

Vaccinated people transmit the virus so it makes zero difference to disabled people.

Natural immunity is better than vaccine immunity so more unvaccinated people might actually be preferable for disabled people. 

 

[Bairnardo]

1 minute ago, LongTimeLurker said:

Life isn't always all about the individual. There's a reason that polio and smallpox were mandatory vaccines. It was possible to eradicate those diseases as a problem for anyone because the vaccines work so well. Unfortunately the COVID-19 shots are not as effective as that. A balance has to be struck between individual freedoms and protecting society in general. In addition to having freedoms we also have responsibilities and in contrast to what Maggie T claimed there is such a thing as society.

I mean, you have absolutely covered why I have an issue with this in your post. 

[Detournement]

2 hours ago, Miguel Sanchez said:

This article suffers from the same problem coverage of vaccination and vaccination rates suffers from here - it doesn't fucking mention any. Remember the vaccines first started and we had stated targets for what amount of the population we needed vaccinated to have some sort of immunity? Funny how that's never mentioned anywhere anymore.

What's clear from case rates in the UK since vaccination began is that even with 100% coverage nothing would fundamentally change other than a small reduction in hospital, ICU, death figures. 

That's why they don't give targets or end dates. 

[LongTimeLurker]

Just now, Bairnardo said:

I mean, you have absolutely covered why I have an issue with this in your post. 

If we have a large outbreak underway and some people have selfishly decided not to get vaccinated when they have been afforded the opportunity to do so, said selfish individuals should be the ones with restrictions on their movements so society in general can continue to function as normally as possible. If there is no large outbreak underway there is no reason to apply these restrictions. The problem we have is that the more this virus is allowed to spread because herd immunity has not been achieved the more chance there is of variants emerging that could endanger the state of near normality that has emerged. If you choose not to participate in the effort to keep things in check then society in general has a right to protect itself from your selfishness.

[AsimButtHitsASix]

4 minutes ago, Detournement said:

Vaccinated people transmit the virus so it makes zero difference to disabled people.

Vaccinated people are far less (63%) likely to transmit the virus so it still makes a difference  source

5 minutes ago, Detournement said:

Natural immunity is better than vaccine immunity so more unvaccinated people might actually be preferable for disabled people. 

Our immune systems don't really care if they learn to battle a disease through catching it "naturally" or via injection. 

If you're referring to immunity via infection to immunity via injection, however, infection-induced and vaccine-induced immunity are last for at least six months (vaccines are more consistent in their protection).

Now, there is an argument, entirely subjective, about rights of the individual and health of others and the rights and wrongs of limiting people's choices based on their own body autonomy. It's not an easy argument and I can disagree with others easily enough but there's nae need to just talk absolute shite. 

[Bairnardo]

Just now, LongTimeLurker said:

If we have a large outbreak underway and some people have selfishly decided not to get vaccinated when they have been afforded the opportunity to do so, said selfish individuals should be the ones with restrictions on their movements so society in general can continue to function as normally as possible. If there is no large outbreak underway there is no reason to apply these restrictions. The problem we have is that the more this virus is allowed to spread because herd immunity has not been achieved the more chance there is of variants emerging that could endanger the state of near normality that has emerged. If you choose not to participate in the effort to keep things in check then society in general has a right to protect itself from your selfishness.

All sound enough logic if the vaccine put a dent in transmission.....

[Detournement]

6 minutes ago, AsimButtHitsASix said:

Vaccinated people are far less (63%) likely to transmit the virus so it still makes a difference  source

Our immune systems don't really care if they learn to battle a disease through catching it "naturally" or via injection. 

If you're referring to immunity via infection to immunity via injection, however, infection-induced and vaccine-induced immunity are last for at least six months (vaccines are more consistent in their protection).

Now, there is an argument, entirely subjective, about rights of the individual and health of others and the rights and wrongs of limiting people's choices based on their own body autonomy. It's not an easy argument and I can disagree with others easily enough but there's nae need to just talk absolute shite. 

The points you are making don't stand up to any scrutiny. In 2020 almost no one caught Covid twice and those who did test positive twice were probably down to false positives. Right now huge numbers of people are testing positive within 6 months of vaccination. 

You link to that study but other studies have found that vaccination makes no difference to transmission.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/28/covid-vaccinated-likely-unjabbed-infect-cohabiters-study-suggests

From the perspective of a person dangerously vulnerable to Covid vaxxed or not makes no difference to the risk of busy public places. 

[Michael W]

14 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

If you choose not to participate in the effort to keep things in check then society in general has a right to protect itself from your selfishness.

How far does this go - do you think the non-vaccinated should be denied medical treatment, for example?