djembatheking
Full Member
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2013
- Messages
- 4,056
I think tiredness has set in generally - vaccinated or not. In the UK, antibody levels suggest that nearly 95% of adults have had covid, or had the vaccine, or had both. Generally I think people (including many scientists) believe we've given it our best shot and there's no reason to wait for some kind of "it's over," improvement, sometime in the indefinite future.Tell me if I totally misunderstood something. These covid vaccines are supposed to reduce the effects of an infection which in theory reduces the infectiousness of someone that has covid? Now it seems that many people think that the vaccine make them immune to the virus, many have seemingly stopped wearing masks where they should, they have stopped washing their hands as often, don't really maintain proper distance with people that are outside of their bubble and generally act as if the virus didn't exist anymore. So is it that surprising that we see a raise in the amount of people infected including vaccinated people?
Not really, not in terms of individual risk for adults - it's still safer to be vaxxed first - but we do need to have a proper conversation about what happens next. There's a difference between being antivax and accepting the limitations of vaccination.
You trust your immune system to a brand new virus? How does that work?I accept and understand everyone who decides to get the vaccine.
Personally, I will not take it.
I trust my natural immune system more than an experimental gene-based vaccination.
I'm doing a lot for my body health via a healthy nutrition, Sport and activity in the fresh air plus enough relaxation and sleep.
I had the virus last year and nearly felt anything expect of two days of mild flu symptoms.
Everybody should be able to make this decision without being punished for it.
I mean that's in his username to clear up any such potential confusionThe way you framed the evidence determines the point you were trying to make. The CDC didn’t frame the evidence as that one statistic with no interpretation, caveats or further discussion…you did. Which implies that single paragraph speaks for itself, it makes its own point. It doesn’t.
You want to take a controversial position without taking any responsibility for defending that position. You just cite other people and ask questions. That’s at the very least lazy, and it comes across as disingenuous. Especially when you end it with sarcastic thanks.
If you want to be taken seriously there’s other ways to do it. If you just want to wind people up then playing the victim doesn’t really work.
Me neither.Not really, not in terms of individual risk for adults - it's still safer to be vaxxed first - but we do need to have a proper conversation about what happens next. There's a difference between being antivax and accepting the limitations of vaccination.
I'm not at all convinced by the idea that mass boosters for example are an appropriate way forward and it alarms me that some countries are already changing vaccine passports to exclude vaccinations that are more than 9 months old.
I'm not convinced on moral grounds - the doses we're talking about dispensing in the autumn are needed globally.
I'm not even convinced by the science so far - chasing ongoing infection efficacy of 90%+ rather than looking at serious illness as the criteria seems wrong.
I also suspect that the real world efficiency calculations being done at the moment are full of holes. With a mostly vaccinated population, and a high level of infection immunity amongst the unvaxxed, it gets harder to find anything like a matched immune-naive control group. Particularly once issues like age, social deprivation, ethnicity, comorbidity, number of social/work contacts enter the picture. Now throw in "willingness to get tested" and I doubt that case rates are accurate enough to look at them on a jab efficacy week-by-week basis as we've started seeing in the press.
True....but based on the remainder of the name you probably be on the lookout for a sword carrying person in red pajamas.I mean that's in his username to clear up any such potential confusion
You used this "evidence" to say there must be long term side effects to vaccination, which is utter nonsense. You might as well say BMW's kill people because 3% of the 12,000 owned one.basically proving my point by trying to frame that quote on me? Did I suggest it or did I simply cite from The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)?
the article actually states that deaths did occurr after vaccination, but that there is no definitive evidence to substantiate that the vaccination was the leading cause.
context my friend!
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I may be wrong in the way I’m reading this but is that apprentice hoping they get pinged this get to call in & ‘isolate’?I was speaking to a young apprentice for a client I work with yesterday. They got the first dose, but aren’t getting the second because it means they won’t have to isolate if they get pinged, or there is a positive case in their office.
Of all the stupid views I’ve had to challenge this year through work, this was probably the hardest, because it’s just pure laziness/selfishness.
I'm not sure but I don't know how people like Didier Raoult in France sleep at night. They fueled the whole anti-vax movement in the entire world and probably caused thousands of deaths if not more. Hope this tought crosses their mind at one point.I wonder how many other people died after being convinced by him that they shouldn’t get a vaccine.
In the NSW outbreak we have,
100 people in ICU
87% no jabs
13% one jab
0% two jabs
It looks like vaccination rates in Australia are really taking off now, which is great. Is that just that supply issues have been sorted out, or is the current outbreak motivating a few more people to get themselves protected do you think?In the NSW outbreak we have,
100 people in ICU
87% no jabs
13% one jab
0% two jabs
Excellent read, thanks for posting!One for the tech enthusiasts. Another study suggesting that though vaxxed people can get covid, it looks like they're less infectious. Hopefully the results get confirmed more widely. Incidentally it does fit with what PHE report - actual contact infection rates being reduced.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
While the preprint is about vaccinated responses to Delta infection, it uses a control group from back in the pre-delta, pre-alpha, pre-vaccine era - which means this is potentially even better news. A discussion of that here:
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Looks like it’s giving organizations license to enforce mandates such as this one:and there you go. Let's see if all those "It's Experimental and not approved!!"people rush out and get their shots
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
@Swiss_Red89 are u ok?
Ain't that the truth.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
The big problem with RNA is the fact that the name is too close to DNA. I'm not joking, call that Messenger Polymeric Molecule or something like that and you defuse half of the antivax arguments.Ain't that the truth.
My team had a call today to where one member discussed this years ECCMID ( European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases ) general meeting that she had (virtually) attended. It was depressing to hear the amount of sessions devoted to combatting vaccine hesitancy. My big concern is that the politicization of the current mRNA vaccines will inhibit and/or discourage future developments in this area. Traditional vaccines have issues, and some (like the polio vaccine) have/had substantial issues. We need to push hard at advances in this area, not discourage them. Right now the low transport/storage temps are the biggest issue. If that can be overcome then this tech should be cheaper and much easier to mass produce.
Possible, but they could have called it "The Safest Molecule Ever XOXO" and people would still freak out because they are being told to do so. The goalposts will always be moved and the "reasons" will always be found.The big problem with RNA is the fact that the name is too close to DNA. I'm not joking, call that Messenger Polymeric Molecule or something like that and you defuse half of the antivax arguments.
Couldn't agree more.Possible, but they could have called it "The Safest Molecule Ever XOXO" and people would still freak out because they are being told to do so. The goalposts will always be moved and the "reasons" will always be found.
I don't think the data suggests the need at this point. A third shot once vaccines are tweaked for Delta will be a good idea IMO but that isn't a booster as such.Excellent review of where we stand about waning immunity. I personally am leaning towards not taking the booster at this time.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I think the debate is more regarding boosters for everyone. Like in USA where from Sep on everyone can get a 3rd booster if I am not mistaken.I thought there was evidence a third shot of Pfizer helped, at least for those over 60? I’m not qualified to debate it, of course.
Here it is: Reuters
They’ve said before that people should get the booster 8 months after, so that opens it up to some of the earlier vaccinated folk but for me that’s December.I think the debate is more regarding boosters for everyone. Like in USA where from Sep on everyone can get a 3rd booster if I am not mistaken.
Boosters will always help the vaccinated in the same way tax breaks for the wealthy will help the wealthy financially. For the few who have lost it all they will be saved, but for the rest it is more dollars in the bank (antibodies in the body). The better plan for the health of the country and world is to get the vaccine into as many people as possible.I thought there was evidence a third shot of Pfizer helped, at least for those over 60? I’m not qualified to debate it, of course.
Here it is: Reuters
Oh man, you had your vaccines right? Hopefully shouldn’t be too bad. Stay home and rest up buddy.I just tested positive. I feel sad.