So I should start calling Stevie a beagle then, not a sheep.
Chinese "Devil Virus" - anyone worried?
- Thread starter manwithnoname
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
So I should start calling Stevie a beagle then, not a sheep.
People inoculated against Covid-19 are just as likely to spread the delta variant of the virus to contacts in their household as those who haven’t had shots, according to new research.
In a yearlong study of 621 people in the U.K. with mild Covid-19, scientists found that their peak viral load was similar regardless of vaccination status, according to a paper published Thursday in The Lancet Infectious Diseases medical journal. The analysis also found that 25% of vaccinated household contacts still contracted the disease from an index case, while 38% of those who hadn’t had shots became infected.
In a yearlong study of 621 people in the U.K. with mild Covid-19, scientists found that their peak viral load was similar regardless of vaccination status, according to a paper published Thursday in The Lancet Infectious Diseases medical journal. The analysis also found that 25% of vaccinated household contacts still contracted the disease from an index case, while 38% of those who hadn’t had shots became infected.
Does that study look at the viral decline in vaccinated and unvaccinated?
I found it and read it. It does say that, the peak load is the same, but reduces a lot quicker for vaccinated people, so less likely to be infected by a vaccinated person. Which is shown clearly enough by the 25% Vs 38% infection rates quoted. I think this just backs up, that vaccination is clearly better than not being vaccinated, but until it's depressed a lot more, other measures need to stay in place.
Fixed
If you don't get significant side effects.
But if you recall when things started we were told you will not get covid if you take the vaccine.
So these results are very disappointing given the fanfare around the vaccine.
I also struggle to see how we can justify restrictions on unvaccinated people given the miniscule difference.
I think we've passed the point of trusting scientific advisors or consensus; we're now down to moralistic arguments and arguing whether you're autonomous in your decision making about your body or if the government controls your body in the name of public safety.
In short: do we trust governments to make health decisions on our behalf?*
* assuming it stops at vaccines.
Last edited:
The people whom this was up to have already voted for the government that would make health decisions on their behalf. How anyone feels about it now is just irrelevant virtue signalling, unless you're actively seeking to make the people feel worse than they already do which has a substantive purpose, so that's ok. Otherwise, it is what it is.
There's a pretty significant impact from the vaccines in stopping Covid causing deaths, it's not miniscule at all. You're less likely to catch it, pass it on, and for it to cause serious illness or death. There is universal consensus on it. Including in that study.
There has never been any vaccine, medicine or anything like that, that has been 100% effective. The efficacy rates were quite loudly shouted about, anyone who thought they would shut down the disease with a hard stop were delusional.
I prefer cats.
Well, we already do. It's compulsory to wear a seatbelt while in a car, a helmet while riding motorbike etc. Then there's people like NICE who set the criteria for what drugs that can be prescribed etc.
Of course whether that's a good thing or not is another question.
The slight difference is seatbelts and helmets were manufactured by engineers who know what they're doing, so they work exactly the way they did during laboratory experiments, because the laws of physics don't inexplicably fail to apply when you step outside of the lab. Also they don't inadvertently kill you for the greater good. The laws of quantitative medicine not so much.
Ergo why you ought to have a choice when it comes to unproven medicines and why you ought to have absolutely no choice when it comes to physics/dantes.
Ergo why you ought to have a choice when it comes to unproven medicines and why you ought to have absolutely no choice when it comes to physics/dantes.
Then you are free to design seatbelts that automatically disengage after the airbags are deployed. You're not free to make similar improvements to the vaccine because your comically shit understanding of the biochemistry wouldn't allow for it.
But in the meantime, if there was a person who had a history of driving into rivers for whatever reason, we can call this person dreamy for arguments sake, then he would have every right to refuse to wear a seatbelt. That's a fair point. But this person doesn't exist.
In terms of the vaccine, the equivalent person does exist. They're everyone under the age of 20, maybe 30 or 40, hard to judge from the shit data. So they should also have the same right.
In terms of the vaccine, the equivalent person does exist. They're everyone under the age of 20, maybe 30 or 40, hard to judge from the shit data. So they should also have the same right.
Yeah, you're losing me Dantes, and it weakens my argument when you're on the same side of the fence as me.
But the seatbelt thing isn't really comparable to vaccines for a whole host of reasons. But not really any of those that you have mentioned.
But the seatbelt thing isn't really comparable to vaccines for a whole host of reasons. But not really any of those that you have mentioned.
That's because there is no downside to wearing a seatbelt for any real person in the country. So if they chose not to, then my taxes and insurance premiums are effectively being stolen by them for lols. It is better the law compels them to wear one, rather than me respond to an act of theft upon them personally.
Vaccines are different because of the downside. It's the reverse situation. I would now be compelling them to risk death for no medical reason, just so overall I pay less tax and health insurance. That isn't even the case because for reasons beyond the woke fools, it is in both our interests that they don't waste the vaccine upon themselves.
Vaccines are different because of the downside. It's the reverse situation. I would now be compelling them to risk death for no medical reason, just so overall I pay less tax and health insurance. That isn't even the case because for reasons beyond the woke fools, it is in both our interests that they don't waste the vaccine upon themselves.
Because road deaths weren't invented by Fauci in a Wuhan lab.
It's not just seatbelts though. They literally decide whether a medicine is worth the cost or not. There could be one medicine that suits your cancer but it'll not be covered so you'll have to crowdfund your way to the states
Does covid exist? Yes
Do the vaccines slow the spread and lower the fatality rate? Yes
Is the pandemic being used to force through authoritarian laws that wouldn't otherwise be possible? Yes
That's about it. If you don't agree with the above then keep arguing over total bullshit.
Do the vaccines slow the spread and lower the fatality rate? Yes
Is the pandemic being used to force through authoritarian laws that wouldn't otherwise be possible? Yes
That's about it. If you don't agree with the above then keep arguing over total bullshit.
That's not related to the government taking your decisions for you. You were never free to decide to treat your cancer in the first place, the alternative is to buy insurance yourself, not to dictate how the public funds are spent.
This is an important question, to which you actually don't have the answer, and you never will because the researchers are nowhere near good enough to get it.
You weren't free to decide because the government have limited your options as two of them are too expensive.
You're confusing freedom with your fantasy utopia. The equivalent comparison would be if the cancer treatment was available, but you wanted to die in dignity or something, but the government took that choice from you and forced you to suffer their treatment. That is a curtailment of your rights and freedoms, akin to forced vaccinations. Complaining about why the government can't afford to pay for something is nothing to do with freedom, it's probably to do with your own woke voting patterns and anti-capitalist delusions.