This is hands down completely and utterly wrong. Whoever told you this or convinced you of this is unfathomably bad at science.
It really isn't.
This is hands down completely and utterly wrong. Whoever told you this or convinced you of this is unfathomably bad at science.
It really isn't.
No, I'd say it's more wrong than supposing the earth is flat.
This is a good example of it in Ireland, as age cohorts got vaccinated, the case numbers went down. Even though restrictions were relaxed over that time.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E_uyaL2WQAEwKGQ?format=jpg&name=large
What do you suppose will happen twelve weeks after the vaccination? If you suppose that infections resume their normal levels, and you suppose as you already did that this gives more opportunity for the virus to mutate, then do you suppose the mutations in a highly vaccinated population will render the vaccine more effective or less effective than in the case of mutations in a less vaccinated population? Or do you suppose the vaccines provide long lasting permanent protection from infection, in defiance of the studies and the real world data?
Mutations will happen more when there are more cases, regardless of if you are vaccinated, immune for previous infection, or unvaccinated. There are more cases when people are unvaccinated, which is shown by the data I just provided. Ireland is a really good example, as it has one of the most vaccinated populations, along with Malta and Portugal.
No vaccine, for any disease, provides unlimited permanent protection, they all require multiple shots and boosters. They are less likely to last longer, once there are mutations.
You're conveniently missing the point. The protection provided by a vaccine is what you have several months after, what is retained in your immune system's memory. That is what protection means, or what it used to mean. This has absolutely nothing to do with the transient elevation of antibodies in your bloodstream shortly after you have received the vaccine. Your approach will see the virus mutate itself at the same rate, but upon a population whose antibodies are based on the vaccine, the very vaccine that is the only thing keeping old people alive. It's a retarded approach. There's no getting away from that.
Right. I find it hard argue against the profiting and control, mainly as it's not something that can really be proved one way or another.
With the effectiveness of the vaccine, there's never been any vaccine that has been 100% effective, we still have cases of measles, even though the majority are vaccinated. And it's always the case of needing boosters, usually there's at 2/3/4 to be effective, and then boosters are every 5/10 years. The problem is if there's a material amount of people not getting vaccinated, it reduces the effectiveness of it, as its transmitted much easier, which leads to more chances of variants happening, some of which will be more dangerous.
So, if you buy all that, and you're one of the people responsible for public health, you'll be doing whatever you can to convince people to be vaccinated. Some will go over the top, like your man in the video(maybe should have talked to his PR advisor before), but I totally get being totally exasperated with people just not listening to the overwhelming medical advice (this is the most tested and analysed vaccine in history).
It's a crappy situation, if not enough get vaccinated, the virus will continue to be transmitted and evolve and kill people. If everyone gets vaccinated, then it's both controlling and there'll be an argument that it wasn't needed as the disease is no longer there.
If there wasn't dozens of vaccines for other diseases, I may bother to look into what you're saying a bit more.
Only 20 minutes of your time if you just watch the video above, assuming it doesn't get fact checked and removed, which it will imminently along with that guy getting fired and probably jailed for racism.
Yes... but when those experts are big tech, big pharma, incompetent governors, some corrupt scientists... all people throughout history have never shown any concern for your health, rights and safety, in fact, their concern is stripping you of those things... then you have to start to at least be a bit sceptical. When you see who is benefiting, how they keep moving the goalposts, how they keep silencing people who later are proven to be right, do you not get a little bit cynical?
Look at this... this terrified me. And it showed me the disastrous direction we are potentially heading in...
What is it that terrifies you about Dan Andrews?
If you can't see what he's saying is terrifying then I can't help you.
I really want to know what terrify you and why?
A lot of it is in response to the current situation - ie less and less people are following the “rules”, cases are soaring (in Australian terms), states need to open up more and it’s become a mad dash to get vaccinated because of the terrible initial roll out.
If it’s about the protests - I think he’s being very specific to what’s happening currently with the problems being created by specific protesters.
I think Andrews is going to far - but I also know that the medical community is shitting itself and infrastructure is already under pressure to cope - and we’re not even near peak hospital cases yet.
The complete dismissal of the right to protest already draconian laws. The forcing of people to inject themselves with something they might not need or want. Taking away people's right to freely work. The threat of violence, locking out of society, arrests etc.
If these people actually cared for your health and wellbeing, they wouldn't be beating people for protesting in the street. They wouldn't be locking you in your house, unable to see your family and friends. They, and people like them, wouldn't be limiting your time with fresh air, exercise, trying to coerce you into getting injected by giving you free kebabs and donuts. They would do something about the obesity and poverty crises, kids who can't afford school meals, they would be doing something about all the things we consume that cause cancer.
But it's not about any of that. It's about gaining more profit and control. People will be looking at this time decades from now as the start of something disastrous and easily avoidable. But we're just goosestepping towards dystopia.
That's about as naive a post as I've ever seen mate. As if the Govt. Big Chem etc. care about anyone except staying in power and lining pockets. That my friend is human nature. And why this world would be better off without our species.The complete dismissal of the right to protest already draconian laws. The forcing of people to inject themselves with something they might not need or want. Taking away people's right to freely work. The threat of violence, locking out of society, arrests etc.
If these people actually cared for your health and wellbeing, they wouldn't be beating people for protesting in the street. They wouldn't be locking you in your house, unable to see your family and friends. They, and people like them, wouldn't be limiting your time with fresh air, exercise, trying to coerce you into getting injected by giving you free kebabs and donuts. They would do something about the obesity and poverty crises, kids who can't afford school meals, they would be doing something about all the things we consume that cause cancer.
But it's not about any of that. It's about gaining more profit and control. People will be looking at this time decades from now as the start of something disastrous and easily avoidable. But we're just goosestepping towards dystopia.
That's about as naive a post as I've ever seen mate. As if the Govt. Big Chem etc. care about anyone except staying in power and lining pockets. That my friend is human nature. And why this world would be better off without our species.
He said he got the vaccine to protect others. To stop him spreading it to other people. Just like driving drunk puts other people at danger - so don't do it. However, the vaccine doesn't stop that. People are still in danger of contracting the virus, whether they take the vaccine or not. It doesn't stop the spread, as is clearly evidenced by all the data. It seems to lower the chance of you being seriously affected by the disease, yes, but that's not the point Klopp was making.
Eh? I think we're making the same point.
Yeah I was making the point that politicians will never do anything unless it works to their measurable benefit. Pretty much everything on Hal's list isn't. Human nature at base precludes pretty much all altruistic tendencies unless they are in some way beneficial to the self/family.I think he’s making the point that Govt, etc are never going to focus on things like obesity, cancer research, etc unless it’s something that is likely to get them re-elected.
It won’t, unfortunately.”, but there are degrees as to how much they are driven by pure self interest and profit.
Oh you mean a system developed by human beings? OK let me see how that fits with what I posted. err nope.If only there was some system in which people's self interest were aligned with the population's interest, some sort of economic model were you compete for profits by providing better things for your fellow people. Hmm, search me I for one can't think of such a thing. Anyway, let's pay more tax and give communism a try, hopefully that will help the people this time, as long as we do it differently to all the other times.
Yeah I was making the point that politicians will never do anything unless it works to their measurable benefit. Pretty much everything on Hal's list isn't. Human nature at base precludes pretty much all altruistic tendencies unless they are in some way beneficial to the self/family.
«It seems to lower».. 89 % less likely isnt seems to lower. It protects you from getting seriously ill or hospitalised. Klopp makes a very good point, but as I figured it would divide the anti and the rest in two.
Oh you mean a system developed by human beings? OK let me see how that fits with what I posted. err nope.
“The great virtue of a free market system is that it does not care what color people are; it does not care what their religion is; it only cares whether they can produce something you want to buy. It is the most effective system we have discovered to enable people who hate one another to deal with one another and help one another.”
“Government has three primary functions. It should provide for military defense of the nation. It should enforce contracts between individuals. It should protect citizens from crimes against themselves or their property. When government-- in pursuit of good intentions tries to rearrange the economy, legislate morality, or help special interests, the cost come in inefficiency, lack of motivation, and loss of freedom. Government should be a referee, not an active player.”
So that the record of history is absolutely crystal clear. That there is no alternative way, so far discovered, of improving the lot of the ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive activities that are unleashed by a free enterprise system.
Again, I'm not denying that it reduces your chance of seriously getting ill. That's not what I'm taking issue with.
What bothers me is likening unvaccinated people to drunk drivers, the less clean, who should be ostracized from society. They provide no greater threat to the vaccinated than other vaccinated people. It's a very dangerous road to go down. And we already went down it about 80 years ago.