Chomper Higgot

Well there’s a shocking surprise.... not!

I tell you what I think. Somebody fed you the falsehood surrounding the change in definition of a vaccine, rather than spending a little time checking* if that were true, it suited your own agenda so you posted the falsehood here. * Had you read and inwardly digested the article you linked to you would have realized you were latched onto this falsehood. Now, unable to defend the falsehood with facts, you resort to implying some kind of conspiracy. As I said earlier: There is no basis for your claim regarding why the definition was modified, you even provided a link to an article that clearly debunks the claim (which I thanked you for). Rather than dreaming up ever more slippery ‘defenses’ I suggest you examine where you get these demonstrable falsehoods from and why it is you don’t check them before reposting them here.

You asserted the definition was changed because the new vaccine(s) could not meet the old definition. Your assertion was a falsehood, which is why it is being criticized. You are not being attacked.

So you make two claims, but at last give us the link: Why would I or anyone else wish to discredit this link? The article clearly outlines the reason for the change in definition, which was not as you asserted because the ‘vaccines didn’t meet the true definition’. The article provides an insight into the ‘with us or gainer us’ behind the ‘conspiracy’ insomuch it’s being promoted by Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky - no surprises that he’s a Republican. What he is not is any kind of medical professional and has no education or experience on the field of virology or vaccines. Not a problem, the article gives an explanation for the definition from the CDC, which is replete with medical professionals and virologists. So: 1. Your assertion that your link would be discredited is unfounded. 2. Your assertion for why the definition was changed is unfounded. Thanks for posting the informative link.

You’d have to provide the link first.

She herself may have been infected and infectious for some days. I would seek medical advice from a doctor but it might be prudent to keep your business closed a day longer while you get all your staff, and yourself, tested,

Or so you assert. However, we do have a string of examples of how anti-vaxxers respond to any basis of their objections being proven wrong - they invent another objection. An endless stream of guff.

I think that is very true.

‘Normalcy’? Far too many people are still getting sick, far too many people are still winding up in hospital and far too many people are still dying of this wretched disease. Or do you seek to ‘normalize’ the almost entirely unnecessary suffering others still face?

A picture tells a thousand words. No defense is perfect, but layers of defense can be extremely effective:

What you are missing Charlie is in your use of language, which I suspect was fed you. Replace ‘Does not stop’ with ‘Significantly reduces’.

COVID is hunting all of us. The unvaccinated are it’s easy prey.

His skills in math didn’t extend to understanding risk. RIP to him and those he convinced to follow his lunacy.

I guess you believe all those people in Congress whining on and on with their ‘vaccines are the chains of slavery’ or some such nonsense have not themselves been vaccinated. As Biden pointed out when he announced his welcome mandate, lots of businesses were already mandating vaccines for those working in their premises - including FOX News. Which explains why Carlson was whiny on about his objections to the mere question of vaccination status.

This has got to be hurting UK colleges and universities. The party of business has lost it’s way.

The question you should be asking is, if you have so many doubts over the vaccine why are you taking it? Or is this another example of not minding consequences of this disease being visited on others so long as Jack’s alright?

It’s not a case of appealing to the logic of anti-vaxxers, as you rightly point out they simply line up the next nonsense. Rather it’s about exposing and challenging their misinformation and outright falsehoods. This particular sub forum is a very important source of information for expats seeking information on the here to get vaccines and other expat related COVID questions. It is important that the anti vaxxer misinformation and falsehoods are not left unchallenged.

Yes 49% effective at preventing infection. And for those who are vaccinated but nevertheless get infected, they are significantly less likely to become seriously ill, hospitalized or die from COVID. Your simplified 49% fails to address this. Now let’s be having your evidence that those who are vaccinated are not at a significantly reduced risk of becoming seriously ill, hospitalized or dying from COVID?! Show us your evidence!

Because I’ve commented on it numerous times, and exposed by calculation the fallacy in the claims anti-vaxxers are making. People who are vaccinated getting mildly ill v those who are not vaccinated becoming seriously ill, hospitalized and dying are all examples of ‘COVID’ cases. They look like the same thing until you examine the data. FACT: People who are vaccinated are at significantly lower risk of becoming seriously ill, hospitalized or dying from COVID. If you have any data to dispute that fact, let’s be having it?!

We’ll there you go again, misrepresenting the facts. Israel’s experience with the Delta variant is that those are vaccinated are very much less likely to become seriously ill, hospitalized or die from the disease than those who are not vaccinated. Your 49% is a simplification of this fact. Go look at the data for people who are not vaccinated.

Again you refer to Israel, which presents data supporting the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. Why not flip to the other end of the vaccine uptake scale and see how Idaho, Florida and other places run by anti-vaxxers are managing?! The mass cases of serious illness, hospitals swamped with unvaccinated people suffering COVID and unvaccinated people dying at an alarming rate is evidence you choose to ignore.

The data from Israel is consistent with data from elsewhere around the world. The unvaccinated are at significantly higher risk of serious illness, hospitalization and death from COVID. Israel’s data confirms vaccines are safe and effective.

I suggest you spend sometime looking into who gets sent to prison in Thailand and who does not. Guilt or innocence, or even the existence of a crime/victim plays only a small part in the matter.

Here we go again. OPENVAERS.COM is a private Anti-Vaccine organization recognized for its efforts in scare mongering and the miss representation of data from the official VAERS database. The people behind and funding of this misinformation organization attempt to remain hidden, though thankfully the press are on the case. https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Bay-Area-woman-openers-site-covid-vaccines-16383086.php https://www.logically.ai/articles/california-woman-anti-vax-site-openvaers OPENVAERS.com is an anti-vaccine misinformation site.

How’s about starting a thread on the efficacy of eating nuts and berries in the fight against COVID. Meanwhile, you’ve argued here for natural immunity based on ‘statistics’ that ignore serious illness, hospitalizations and deaths. And you aren’t able to produce any data to refute the effectiveness of vaccines in reducing serious illness, hospitalizations and deaths.