Coronavirus (Covid-19) Discussion
-
I LFT every 3rd day, and if a positive was indicated I'd have a PCR and self isolate and follow Gov.uk guidance as required. I am at less risk of spreading covid than a fully vaccinated person that does not test, or does not test regularly. As of August double vaccinated people (England, possibly NI, Wales, and Scotland) do not have to self isolate when they test positive. Therefore vaccinated people are free to spread. I would continue to isolate as required. Do the maths.
'You have to test on animals, human or otherwise' correct, in the UK pharmaceutical companies do have to test on animals to get a licence to bring your product to the licence. AI modelling is generally (by academics… Look up the research) considered more reliable than testing on other species. Trouble is it costs more so the pharmas don't lobby government for changes in legislation. Pharma and tech lobbying of Government in the UK and USA carries a hell of a lot of weight economically.
PHE have stated that covid vaccines in the UK will be opt ins in about 2-3 years, the same as influenza.
I always link to reliable resources such as the Ons and NEVER the fucking media, that edit to meet an overarching agenda. If I could invite you all to sit in on some of the MS Team's meetings I attend, I would. It would open a few eyes and minds.
Deaths within 28 days of a positive covid test in last 7 days 445
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk
Deaths with Covid on the death certificate past 7 days 213
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths
That's a discrepancy in how the media portrays this data of 232. That's over 51%
I have to analyse this fucking data on a week to week basis, and I used to put the news on in the evening. Most of us in my department have stopped as it just winds us up.
I've been back in our regional acute hospital this past couple of weeks too, for work and private reasons. They were interesting experiences.
-
@Stuart.T your first paragraph rests upon the supposition that infected, vaccinated people can still spread the virus as readily as unvaccinated, infected people (asymptomatic or not), but also includes a glaringly obvious fallacy: you're comparing yourself to vaccinated people who don't test regularly and follow protocols if they are infected, when you should be comparing your unvaccinated to your vaccinated self. There you will see that the risk to yourself and to others is reduced, therefore you should get vaccinated. Pretty simple.
Nothing else you've said supports your arguments either.
Could we be living in a world without animal testing? Perhaps, but we don't. So it is a meaningless argument. That testing has already happened. You're not changing that or future animal testing, you're just helping make that testing go to waste.
Could the media be off in their numbers? Sure, but we know the disease is deadly and has lasting effects. It is worth trying to mitigate this disease in the wild at least until we better understand it.
Not sure what agenda you think the media is pursuing here but all signs point to getting stuck.
-
Testing among those double vaccinated has nose dived in England. ONS research suggests this is due to people's belief that they are protected, that's their priority, and testing is not a legal requirement. I am comparing myself against this benchmark.
My view on animal testing is a personal value. I mentioned it only as a counterpoint, as thankfully we don't live in an autocracy in the UK. That is my own subjective opinion.
This is a hugely important discussion (covid and vaccination). I think it reasonable to link to reliable sources of data. I'm not afforded subjective opinions at work, they have to be supported with objective research and data, or established theory at best. If you have time, please read the linked data and articles, they are interesting.
It is really difficult for me discuss covid subjectively as I spend 37 hrs a week immersed in it. I value the opportunity to discuss these issues, but I also don't appreciate being alluded to as an egoist etc. I'd hate the thought that we might succumb to mob rule mentalities in our societies. Two way discussion is a good thing.
-
Could the media be off in their numbers? Sure, but we know the disease is deadly and has lasting effects. It is worth trying to mitigate this disease in the wild at least until we better understand it.
Not sure what agenda you think the media is pursuing here but all signs point to getting stuck.
I definitely agree with most of your points here, but I do have to say that the media does enjoy maximizing our reactions to this and always has a tendency of hyper inflating data to serve their purpose. The media isn’t ran for the sake of public education anymore, it’s ran as a business. How do you keep a customer? I don’t think they’re ashamed of using fear
-
Once again, these statements don't withstand the most trivial scrutiny.
I know you have insisted that comparing yourself to other, vaccinated people is valid, but as explained above, it is not. The important question is, will you, your loved ones, and your community, all else aside, be safer if you vaccinate or if you don't? From a logical perspective the answer is clearly that vaccination is the safer choice.
The preponderance of peer reviewed and hospital data do not support your position either. Again, upwards of 98% of hospitalizations in every geography I've seen figures for have been unvaccinated patients. And the vaccines have generally been very safe. You really have to look hard for the few edge case exceptions to that. And when you look at charts comparing vaccination rates to hospitalizations, a very strong (inverse) linear correlation is always there. From a data perspective, the answer is clear.
Sure, you have a personal view that animal testing is unnecessary. You're letting this personal belief take a part in guiding a public act (not getting vaccinated is very much a public decision, because it impacts the entire community). I consider this a non sequitur, as at the end of the day at least the animals would not have had their lives taken in vain if the vaccines are allowed to serve their purpose of protecting people's health, which is compromised every time people who are able to vaccinate fail to do so. Then your personal decision and public action are likely to add up to a (public) problem for other people (as well as a personal problem for you). And the animals are still dead, only their lives mean a little bit less. Meanwhile, human life is jeapordized by your decision. From a moral perspective, the answer is clear, as ultimately, you're not helping the animals, and you're potentially harming yourself and your community.
So the math doesn't add up. Which is fine, but it would be a lot easier to say "I don't want to take the vaccine" without attaching reasons to that decision that don't make sense.
But I guess you are helping yourself and maybe that's all that matters. Perhaps in your moral universe feeling morally superior is more important than utilitarianism, and however misguided that may be in my eyes, it is your right to be wrong.
I hope you think more deeply about the decision and its broader impact, and that's all else I'll say on the topic.
-
I would agree @cwcaswell that the media is a sensationalism machine, which is why you have to think things through without panicking based on what they say. And that includes not reflexively taking a contrarian position to their narratives, but rather thinking through the best course of action.
-
I like to think of it as thinning the herd.
-
would you say the same to an individual, that for medical/ health reasons, cannot be vaccinated?
vaccinations should not be a diversifying topic whether an individual chooses to do so or not. as much as vaccination benefits an entire community, the choice they make should ultimately be left to an individual as to whether they decide to do so or not and without the pressure, views and/or opinions of everyone else.
I personally think that all these vaccination debate around the world is creating more of a divide rather than uniting us as a population to fight against this virus that we face..
-
would you say the same to an individual, that for medical/ health reasons, cannot be vaccinated?
vaccinations should not be a diversifying topic whether an individual chooses to do so or not. as much as vaccination benefits an entire community, the choice they make should ultimately be left to an individual as to whether they decide to do so or not and without the pressure, views and/or opinions of everyone else.
I personally think that all these vaccination debate around the world is creating more of a divide rather than uniting us as a population to fight against this virus that we face..
Sorry I'm going to have to disagree with literally everything that is quoted above.
Data has proven, and continues to prove, the benefit and ultimately the need for vaccinations. They work. They save lives. That is not debatable. Because of these facts, when a healthy individual chooses to not get a vaccination for one reason or another they are making a selfish choice that puts those around them at risk. People that cannot be vaccinated are exactly the type of people that benefit from those who can be vaccinated choosing to do so. Healthy people should be UNITING together by getting vaccinated and helping those who cannot.
There also should be immense pressure to vaccinate put on those who are able to do so. To be blunt, society as a whole should be perfectly willing to hurt someone's poor little feelings by criticizing them for making a selfish and self-centered decision that ultimately puts members of that society at risk.
You want to know what the key to fighting a pandemic or any deadly virus is? People getting vaccinated. It absolutely is not everyone coming together and saying, "I respect your decision to get or not to get vaccinated."
-
I’ve yet to hear of a person having a legitimate medical reason to not get vaccinated. Can you tell me one? I’m sure there are such exceptions, but I’m guessing they’re pretty few and far between. In all of the talk about COVID over the past year and a half, I’ve consumed a ton of information and have yet to hear of literally one medical condition that prohibits the vaccine. I’m not saying there aren’t prohibitive conditions, but they’re insignificant enough to basically never be mentioned. Outliers. Maybe it’s the same “conditions” that those people wore those BS bracelets for that somehow signified an inability to wear a mask. Most of the denial I’ve heard has to do with distrust, misinformation, and in my opinion, selfishness. Sure — I understand the importance of having individual rights, but when your stubbornness puts other people at risk and generally prolongs the existence of this disease, it’s a problem. Sometimes you should be willing to cooperate for the greater good. Anyway, there are my two cents. I don’t see much hope of converting anyone, but hey — your refusal affects all of us.
EDIT: I should clarify that I was responding to two posts back, and that I wholeheartedly agree with the subsequent response.
-
@popvulture I'm definitely on the pro-vax side, but there are a lot of people who would be allergic to ingredients. I have a few mild allergies and they gave me an 'anaphylactic shock' sticker when I had my first jab incase it went west. I think the critical thing is that yes there are people who cannot have the vaccine for medical reasons, but that puts the onus on those of us who can to do our bit and get jabbed
-
Alright, gotcha! Thank you for clarifying. I’ve been mega fired up about this since they raised our alert level here in Austin on Friday. I am furious, so please excuse me if I sound like a bit of a bare wire.
-
Fair enough pal, I think we're all sick to the back teeth of it and getting jab appears to be our best way out of it all. Appears to be working well in the UK at least
-
Yep it’s working well here too! I’ve known a couple of people who’ve managed to test positive despite being vaxed, either having no symptoms or mild ones. This is the kind of outcome I like to see — I know it’s not going to 100% prevent it, but it’s good to know it does the job of limiting severe symptoms and hospitalization. What scares the shit out of me is not nipping it in the bud before some super resistant mutation develops. Buckle up, I guess!
-
A buddy of mine is undergoing chemotherapy, its scorched earth purpose is to kill cancer cells (including healthy ones). He is immunocompromised. Can't take any vaccines until his systems get back to "normal".
-
It's not lost on me that my first reaction when I hear of people not being able to receive the vaccine is to perceive it as some sort of sham. I've witnessed more than a few people claiming such things when its clearly an excuse, as well as reasons they can't wear a mask, etc — it sucks that people like that have made me more than a bit cynical.
That reason above is obviously completely legitimate. Echoing what other people have said previously, I hope that people who can get the vaccine will think of people like your friend. I'm sure your buddy would appreciate it.
-
@Omega:
A buddy of mine is undergoing chemotherapy, its scorched earth purpose is to kill cancer cells (including healthy ones). He is immunocompromised. Can't take any vaccines until his systems get back to "normal".
…and therefore is reliant on the people around him getting vaccinated and tested to reduce the risk for him getting in contact with the virus.
I am a dentist, have a PhD in medicine and was an army doctor. During the time with the highest number of hospitalized patients we were called back to hospital to get trained at Covid ICU's... just in case things will increase even more.
People were dying there daily back then. Old people, young people, healthy people and people with multiple diseases. A 19 year old top athlete was 11 weeks there. He is now still suffering with post-covid syndrome. There was no fucking therapy the only thing that could be done was giving oxygen. It's been an awful death and a lonely death. Usually no relatives were allowed to get into Covid-19 ICU's. So the last thing you might see when you lie there are not your beloved ones but the light of the laryngoscope. I really really hope we will not get there again in autumn or winter. Therefore anyone who CAN get vaccinated should get the fucking jab. -
@Omega:
A buddy of mine is undergoing chemotherapy, its scorched earth purpose is to kill cancer cells (including healthy ones). He is immunocompromised. Can't take any vaccines until his systems get back to "normal".
…and therefore is reliant on the people around him getting vaccinated and tested to reduce the risk for him getting in contact with the virus.
Therefore anyone who CAN get vaccinated should get the fucking jab.
as are children under 12 who at this point can not get the vaccination. (I have two in the group)
GET THE FUCKING SHOT!
