Coronavirus

[Anubis]

 

 

[Pureblood]

4 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

I would imagine this is by many multiples the largest and quickest mass vaccination ever. So per million doses?

I think even taking into account the scale of the rollout these are the most dangerous statistically.  The VAERS dashboard has been lively. 

[Pureblood]

5 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Come on man.,

Even you know that is ridiculous. By far the biggest scruffs of the whole ordeal have been both anti-mask, anti-vaxx. Many vehemently.

You know that 100% of those folks have been the most prolific spreaders throughout.

 

 

I don't think it's ridiculous, that's why I typed it. 

 

I think vaccinated people are more likely to mix, go on holiday and so on. I've observed this anecdotally in my own circles.  All my vaccinated acquaintances are mixing more now, and are generally more active, than they were before they had the vaccine.  That's not a criticism, just an observation. 

[TheHowieLama]

6 minutes ago, TK421 said:

I think even taking into account the scale of the rollout these are the most dangerous statistically.  The VAERS dashboard has been lively. 

I have no idea but I cannot recall there has ever been a period of 18 months like that. Estimates of over 2.5 billion shots in that time frame.

[TheHowieLama]

1 minute ago, TK421 said:

 

I think vaccinated people are more likely to mix, go on holiday and so on. 

Anti maskers (read 98% of anti vaxxers - opinion) never stopped doing that.

[Pureblood]

3 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Anti maskers (read 98% of anti vaxxers - opinion) never stopped doing that.

It depends how you define "anti vaxxers". It ranges from people who think Bill Gates installs windows xp inside you to people like me who are not anti-vaxx but have hesitancy.  It's probably not helpful to lump them all into the same bracket. 

[Scott_M]

I’m not against the new 4 week delay but there shouldn’t be many, if any, more of them.

[Pureblood]

1 minute ago, Scott_M said:

I’m not against the new 4 week delay but there shouldn’t be many, if any, more of them.

What if tens of thousands of people die?

[Scott_M]

4 minutes ago, TK421 said:

What if tens of thousands of people die?

How long is it going to go on then?

 

I’m not against continuing to wear a mask while shopping, sanitising my hands in every shop, doing track & trace or showing my vaccination via the NHS app at all, but as Chris said a few pages back, the issue is those in elderly, vulnerable or ethnic groups who aren’t willing to be vaccinated.

 

Sorry, but that’s their choice now.

[Curly]

4 minutes ago, TK421 said:

What if tens of thousands of people die?

Less likely if everyone gets vaccinated

[s(k)aturation]

17 minutes ago, TK421 said:

It depends how you define "anti vaxxers". It ranges from people who think Bill Gates installs windows xp inside you to people like me who are not anti-vaxx but have hesitancy.  It's probably not helpful to lump them all into the same bracket. 

I'm 54.

My wife is 47.

She is eligible for Pfizer.

Me, "only" AstraZeneca.

My mother had a blood clot 3 years ago in her thigh, huge, some of it had spread to the bottom of her lungs.

She is now on blood thinners, so at very "low risk" from the AstraZeneca vaccine's anecdotal clotting "dangerousness" - it too being the only vaccine for which she is eligible, currently.

Mum tells me her clot was not hereditary, but she was in real estate, never a doctor, as far as I can remember.

It seems the descending/ascending algorithm in Australia is that older people are eligible for the anecdotally, less effective, more "dangerous" vaccine, and younger people are eligible for, anecdotally, the more effective, less "dangerous" vaccine.

 

I am confused, a little angry, cynical and skeptical.

And yes, hesitant.

 

So shoot me.

 

 

[Pureblood]

3 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

How long is it going to go on then?

I don't know, for at least five or maybe ten years I would think at a guess.

 

And we can have a pretence that there is no third wave, we can have a pretence that people aren't being hospitalised and dying. None of that will make it go away, we can't wish it away. 

 

So I ask again, if tens of thousands of people continue to die would you be in favour of a lockdown?  I would be. 

[TheHowieLama]

10 minutes ago, TK421 said:

It depends how you define "anti vaxxers". It ranges from people who think Bill Gates installs windows xp inside you to people like me who are not anti-vaxx but have hesitancy.  It's probably not helpful to lump them all into the same bracket. 

They are though. The reasons for folks not wanting to wear masks were diverse as well.

 

BTW I agree that nothing should be "mandated." Masks - you were very vocal in that "mandate."

 

Fact is if you choose to not get vaccinated and that negatively affects you entering certain establishments, working for some employers, social opportunities - tough shit right.

[Pureblood]

3 minutes ago, skaro said:

I'm 54.

My wife is 47.

She is eligible for Pfizer.

Me, "only" AstraZeneca.

My mother had a blood clot 3 years ago in her thigh, huge, some of it had spread to the bottom of her lungs.

She is now on blood thinners, so at very low risk from the AstraZeneca vaccine's anecdotal clotting "dangerousness" - it too being the only vaccine for which she is eligible, currently.

Mum tells me her clot was not hereditary, but she was in real estate, not a doctor, as far as I can remember.

It seems the descending/ascending algorithm in Australia is that older people are eligible for the anecdotally, less effective, more "dangerous" vaccine, and younger people are eligible for, anecdotally, the more effective, less "dangerous" vaccine.

 

I am confused.

And yes, I am hesitant.

 

So shoot me.

 

 

I

Yeah, it's not straightforward for some people.

[Pureblood]

1 minute ago, TheHowieLama said:

Fact is if you choose to not get vaccinated and that negatively affects you entering certain establishments, working for some employers, social opportunities - tough shit right.

I'm okay with that. I wouldn't want to attend any venue or workplace where vaccinations are compulsory.

 

And the mask thing is a false equivalence because nobody gets blood clots from wearing a mask. 

[Curly]

3 minutes ago, TK421 said:

I don't know, for at least five or maybe ten years I would think at a guess.

 

And we can have a pretence that there is no third wave, we can have a pretence that people aren't being hospitalised and dying. None of that will make it go away, we can't wish it away. 

 

So I ask again, if tens of thousands of people continue to die would you be in favour of a lockdown?  I would be. 

I think you talk a fair old bit of hypocritical, condescending, variable and questionable shite

[Pureblood]

2 minutes ago, belarus said:

I think you talk a fair old bit of hypocritical, condescending, variable and questionable shite

That's the nicest thing anyone's said to me this pandemic. 

[TheHowieLama]

5 minutes ago, TK421 said:

I'm okay with that. I wouldn't want to attend any venue or workplace where vaccinations are compulsory.

 

And the mask thing is a false equivalence because nobody gets blood clots from wearing a mask. 

Not yet it's not. Wait a couple years and there will be old geezers like Stronts claiming wearing one ( especially when it got damp) inhibited their breathing and has caused accelerated breathing difficulties. Or their heart was under un-due stress.

And their were consequences for refusing to wear one at that time socially and professionally.

 

The liberty issue is the same. You don't want to do something. Thats ok.

[s(k)aturation]

10 minutes ago, belarus said:

I think you talk a fair old bit of hypocritical, condescending, variable and questionable shite

 

Let he without serum cast, sling-shot from his unworn mask, the first stone.

 

 

[Barrington Womble]

48 minutes ago, TK421 said:

That's a very broad generalisation to make and one I disagree with. I mean, unless you know each of these vaccinated people personally how do you know they've done "everything possible to reduce their likelihood of carrying the virus"? For all you know, they could have been having daily orgies.

 

In fact, paradoxically, I'd say that vaccinated people could be MORE likely to be infectious because mentally they are more likely to have relaxed their guard, socialised and mixed more and so on. 

 

For those of you who have been vaccinated, have you found yourself mixing more since you had the injection?

By everything possible, I mean having the jab. We're trying to head to a world with less restrictions not more. And while clearly people who've had the jab can still get infected, those periods of being contagious are likely to be shorter. Having orgies will be legally just fine soon (well at 6 people at a gathering probably now if we can get on board with 6 is an orgie), but I want to be able to go places again and if a vaccine passport is one way to achieve that, I'm ok with that. You obviously aren't because you don't want the vaccine, yet want to be unaffected by any restrictions that will still apply in the future. 

 

Like it or not we have a government who have made it abundantly clear we have only one way out of this pandemic. We're unlikely to get a new government any time soon, so if covid passports are what is required to get the brothels and orgies going at full swing (pun intended), then personally I don't care. I am more than happy for anyone not to have a jab, but don't be shocked if it means it restricts your access to things. 

[Pureblood]

4 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Not yet it's not. Wait a couple years and there will be old geezers like Stronts claiming wearing one ( especially when it got damp) inhibited their breathing and has caused accelerated breathing difficulties. Or their heart was under un-due stress.

And their were consequences for refusing to wear one at that time socially and professionally.

 

The liberty issue is the same. You don't want to do something. Thats ok.

I don't see the similarities.  A mask is a temporary burden, worn for a short period of time, and is obviously safe for most people. 

 

A vaccine can put you on a slab within hours.

 

[TheHowieLama]

1 minute ago, TK421 said:

I don't see the similarities.  A mask is a temporary burden, worn for a short period of time, and is obviously safe for most people. 

 

A vaccine can put you on a slab within hours.

 

I get it - your line at personal liberty is in a different place. Pretty sure you understand that the majority of folks on your current side of the line would not agree with that. You have just said it will be years.

 

Most on the other side think the same of vaccines.

[TheHowieLama]

4 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

Having orgies will be legally just fine soon (well at 6 people at a gathering probably now if we can get on board with 6 is an orgie),

I feel like now would be an ideal time for a review of the Swedish model.

[Pureblood]

Just now, Barrington Womble said:

You obviously aren't because you don't want the vaccine, yet want to be unaffected by any restrictions that will still apply in the future. 

No, it's not a "cake and eat it" thing at all. I don't want there to be vaccine passports as I don't think they will work in reducing infections, but if they are introduced I have no problem being excluded from places such as pubs or holidays etc. 

 

I'm quite happy to scale back my life and enjoy the little things instead like a walk on my local beach. 

[Barrington Womble]

33 minutes ago, TK421 said:

It depends how you define "anti vaxxers". It ranges from people who think Bill Gates installs windows xp inside you to people like me who are not anti-vaxx but have hesitancy.  It's probably not helpful to lump them all into the same bracket. 

Anti vax is anyone who's anti the vaccine. It seems pretty simple. Most of the people who are anti the vaccine. It seems reasonable to group them together. The majority of people who are anti vax are also anti mask.