Ryan754326

1 minute ago, Jeffr2 said:

Because it is irrelevant.

It’s not irrelevant at all if your argument for mandatory vaccination is the cost and unnecessary strain that covid puts on hospitals. 

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You assume ‘self inflicted’.

 

Life style diseases occur in a population at a predictable rate, they don’t grow exponentially over very short periods as do COVID infections.

 

 

What difference does it make? People with lifestyle related illnesses have been straining the system forever, and they represent a very large portion of those who are dying from covid as well. 
 

Without those people, the system could cope much easier. That’s all there is to it. 

3 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

Ridiculous to try and compare old flu seasons with what's going on now.  But typical of a covid denier.  Classic actually.

I’m just stating facts. I’m sorry if they’re inconvenient to you.

If you can dig up a quote where I’ve ever denied the existence of covid, or it’s severity to certain groups of people I will delete my account on this forum, and you’ll never have to read one of my posts ever again. 

2 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

He said this:

An absolutely disgusting thing to say.  Especially since many lung cancer patients don't get cancer from smoking.  I've got a relative like this.  Not sure where she got it, but she's dying.  Never smoked a day in her life.

I’m not talking about your relative. I’m talking about the people who knew the risks of smoking from the very beginning and chose to do it anyway, and then expected to be saved at any cost to the system when they predictably got cancer. 
These people have been taking up space in hospitals forever. I’m sorry if you think it’s disgusting that I don’t have much sympathy for them. 
 

2 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

 

I think you'll agree a good portion of the world isn't educated enough to make intelligent medical decisions like this.  

A good portion of the world isn’t smart enough to make most of the important decisions in life. Does that mean we should let the government make these decisions for us? 
 

Maybe they should decide what we eat, what we drink, how many hours a day we can spend sitting on the couch or at our computer desk, whether or not we’re allowed to make babies.
It would probably improve a lot of people’s situation in life if they did, but it’s not the world I want to live in. 

2 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

An absolutely disgusting thing to say.  Hopefully, you're just trolling and don't really think that.  There are easier ways around this.  Sad you don't agree with them.

It was a question, and you didn’t answer it. Not trolling at all. 
 

You’ve suggested before that the unvaccinated should move to the back of the line for healthcare, so why shouldn’t someone who has been vaccinated, but also neglected their own health for decades, fall behind someone like me if there is limited care available?

Just now, placeholder said:

More of the same nonsense. For one thing, the rise in obesity has it been a gradual increase over the years. So hospitals were you able to cope with it. On the other hand, the Covid pandemic has come in the form of surges. Surges that repeatedly overwhelmed Hospital systems. I have yet to see any evidence of such a similar drastic surge in obesity. Please feel free to provide it.

Hospitals in my country ( Canada) have been overwhelmed like clockwork, every flu season, for as long as I can remember. 
Old people with chronic health problems, most of those related to obesity, kept them near capacity in the best of times. 

8 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Agreed! But they're not infecting others, extending this pandemic, and allowing variants to crop up.  No comparison at all.  Though I do agree with you.

Everyone is infecting everyone at this point. Cases are higher than ever and keep on rising, despite more and more vaccines being pushed on people. 
Once again, it blows my mind that you keep trying to deny this, even though I know, that you know, vaccinated people are still spreading it. 
 

A year form now, you will most likely have had covid too. Maybe then we will finally be able to move past this. 

24 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

  Individuals choice to get fat or not is their problem.  Not mine...for the most part.

So as a young, healthy person who has been vaccinated, should I have the right to bump the fat old lung cancer patient out of his hospital bed if there aren’t enough left for me when I show up with a covid infection? 
 

Your denial that all of these self-inflicted health issues have any effect on anyone else is mind-blowing. 

2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Those aren't infectious.

This again???

It’s been shown again and again that the vaccinated are still spreading covid, and when it gets shown to those here, they come back with, “yes, but it’s about saving the hospitals from being overwhelmed”. 
Well, drinkers, smokers, and and anyone else who lives a generally unhealthy lifestyle are straining healthcare systems too, and were doing so long before covid ever came along. 
 

So which is it? Do people need to get vaccinated because covid might kill them, even if they’ve already survived covid?
Or is it about saving our overwhelmed healthcare systems? because if it’s that one, then those living unhealthy lifestyles are just as much to blame. 

9 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

 

 

How about this?  You don't want to vax, you need a special health insurance.  That would change things quickly.

I’d be perfectly fine with a policy like that, as long as it also applies to those who drink alcohol, smoke cigarettes, or eat too much McDonald’s. 
 

And I’m not throwing anyone under the bus. I’m arguing that they should take it upon themselves to do whatever they feel is necessary to protect themselves, rather than expecting everyone else to do it for them.
 

12 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

The answer is not that complicated.  By pushing an individual to eat better and exercising you improve only that one individuals outcome.  In pushing for vaccinations, the health of the individual PLUS those around them is improved.  In other words killing/wounding several birds with one shot.

I disagree. How much extra capacity would our hospitals have if we took all of the people out of the picture who only remain alive today because of medical intervention, or a steady diet of prescription drugs?

People who neglect their overall health by eating poorly and living a sedentary lifestyle are every bit as much of a strain on our hospitals as the willingly unvaccinated are.

4 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

Best way around this is for those who are not vaccinated to take the extra precautions.  Have them avoid social contact.  Makes a lot of sense and many nations are moving forward with this.  No jab, stay home.

No, it’s not the best way around. Those who are highly vulnerable to covid represent a tiny portion of the population.
Right now, there are more unvaccinated people on this planet who simply can’t get a vaccine if they want one, than there are highly vulnerable people.

3 hours ago, Credo said:

Oh, you haven't been paying close attention.  Have you not read some of the posts from those who blame the overweight for catching Covid because they have allowed themselves to get fat?   

 

The same people who demand the freedom not to wear masks or get vaccinated have no problem of making the elderly 'be careful' and isolate.  Apparently, their rights and freedom of movement doesn't matter.

It seems to me like the people who don’t want to get vaccinated really don’t care what the obese do with themselves. 
 

It’s the minority of people who are most vulnerable to covid that seem to be the ones who want to put restrictions on others lives; not the other way around. 

If you’re afraid of getting hit by a car, it’s your job to stay off of the road. You can’t expect everyone else to stop driving so that you feel safe walking down the sidewalk. 

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

By the same argument, it makes a lot of sense to limit the social interactions of those who refuse to be vaccinated.

 

Since they refuse to voluntarily do what’s necessary to help themselves and help others, they make the case for compulsion.

I think you’re more worried about the “help others” part, than the “help themselves” part. 

Once again, you’re so focused on the anti-vaxxers, that you disregard all of the people in less developed countries who still don’t have access to a vaccine in the first place, and probably won’t have access for some time yet. These countries are where new mutations are most likely to pop up. Should those people also be forced to shut their lives off and isolate themselves until they have the opportunity to be vaccinated?

The countries who do have easy access to vaccines, and high rates of vaccination,  have tried excluding the unvaccinated from society, and it didn’t do anything to slow down the spread. 

If you think compulsion should be used to push people into being vaccinated, in order to take pressure off of our fragile healthcare systems, then why shouldn’t it be used to push people into eating better and exercising regularly? 
Maybe an obesity tax, or tightly controlled access to food that is high in fat and sugar are needed too. 

2 hours ago, Credo said:

 

 

2.   It's mostly older people and people with comorbitities that are dying.   That assumption has some grounding in truth, but is there some reason that elderly people should be allowed to die?  Is it OK for obese people, people with diabetes, people undergoing cancer treatment and those with immune disorders to die?   This type of reasoning is not rational thinking and is just a way of minimizing the significance of the deaths. 

 

 

 

 

I’ve never heard anyone suggest that old people, or those with co-morbidities should just be allowed to die.
What is being said, is that going forward, those people should be ones who have to take extra precautions to protect their own health, rather than the whole of society. 
We can all make the world a safer place for the old and vulnerable by avoiding social contact with others in some hopeless attempt to slow the spread, but that will cause major disruptions in society. The way I see it, it makes a lot more sense for those vulnerable people to be the ones who limit their own social interactions, if they feel that they need to. 
 

On 1/26/2022 at 11:18 PM, transam said:

There have always been hiccups in ordinary folks lives, for instance, my grandparents, 1914/18, my parents, 1939/45, no ifs or buts, get on with it...????

I’ve always accepted the reality that bad things can happen in life, and I’m grateful that I haven’t had to deal with a war in my lifetime, but getting on with it is exactly what most people seem to want to do at this point. 
There is no longer any good reason for those who are at low risk to be under any social restrictions. The UK government has apparently figured this much out, and is lifting them. All that it took was for a bunch of public servants to get caught partying, while everyone else was supposed to be locked down… And for people to see that those making the rules weren’t actually as scared of this virus as they wanted the general population to be. 

On 1/26/2022 at 11:13 PM, Chomper Higgot said:

COVID is a ‘Public Health Threat’ and is being met with ‘Public Health Responses’.

 

What some individuals perceive to be the major risks in their day to day life is an irrelevance.

 

Sorry for the inconvenience this causes you.

The entire point of my argument is that the public health responses aren’t taking into consideration who is actually at serious risk from covid, and who is not.  
What you call an inconvenience has destroyed many peoples lives and businesses. There are restaurants in my area that were open for decades, that have shut down over this, and now those people are left trying to rebuild their lives from scratch. 
 

I don’t think my “perception” of risks in my day to day life is irrelevant either. It’s no perception, the numbers prove it; I’m at extremely low risk of anything bad happening if I catch covid (again).

What do you think would happen if everyone perceived covid to be as dangerous as you do, and just decided it wasn’t worth the risk to go to work anymore?

Medical systems would have collapsed long ago (along with rest of the economy) due to lack of tax revenues, rather than from too many people showing up at hospitals.

On 1/27/2022 at 8:10 AM, mommysboy said:

'bet most of you would call me crazy if I suggested that this nocebo effect mig.......'

 

Yes.

Call me whatever you want. 

My humble opinion is that most (not all) of the people who are claiming to have long covid are just anxiety ridden hypochondriacs looking for an excuse to stay home from work and collect welfare. 
If the nocebo effect can legitimately cause someone to think that they are suffering side effects from a vaccine, then why couldn’t it cause someone to think that their covid infection keeps lingering on in the form of symptoms that can’t really be measured, such as fatigue, brain fog, and muscle aches?

I’m just telling it the way I see it: I know a lot of people who have had covid, and the only ones who claim to be suffering from some kind of long covid are the ones who need a week off of work every time they get a runny nose, or have some kind of unproven ailment that prevents them from doing any heavy lifting on the job. 

42 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Has it occurred to you that COVID is in addition to all other risks?

 

The presence of those other risks does not negate the risks from COVID.

 

Yes there are many people who do risky jobs (more risky than COVID?)

 

However, millions, billions more, regardless of occupation, are at continual risk from COVID and all those in high risk jobs have the additional risk of COVID.

 

It’s COVID filling up ICU units and overloading health services across the globe, not work related accidents.

Many jobs are in fact riskier than covid to the majority of younger people who are in good health. My example of a Thai moto-taxi driver is just one, and the numbers back that up. 
 

It doesn’t seem to occur to you that for many of us who are statistically at a very low risk of dying from covid, it’s an easy choice between taking our chances out in the world, or hiding inside and going broke. 

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Well like you say, you don’t live here.

 

Your view from afar is noted.

I don’t see how the fact that I’m not living permanently in Thailand diminishes the point I was making.  
There are many people who have no choice but to spend every day doing a job that has a greater potential of killing them than covid does 

When you look at the numbers, do you think that the average moto-taxi driver in Thailand should be more worried about catching covid from his passengers, or being run over by a truck that is using the wrong lane to pass?

17 hours ago, cdemundo said:

 

 

Right.

The original article was about jab side effects, not at all about long covid.

Sorry to bring an alternative viewpoint into the conversation. It just struck me as an interesting side point that if the nocebo effect is, in fact, real, which the research seems to confirm, then maybe it’s possible that it also affects those who have stressed themselves out more than necessary due to their fear of long covid. 

2 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

You don’t appear to have checked the string of this thread where I was referencing the 700 children in the US who have already lost their lives to covid as there was no vaccine available to them. Had there been then those 700 children would still be alive today.

Maybe he saw my reference to the even greater number of children who would still be alive today if we’d just forced those selfish swimming pool owners to fill them in with dirt. 
I bet all those parents who ignored the statistics wish they hadn’t left them sitting there full of water. 
 

Dig deeper into the statistics and you’ll also see that many of those kids who died of covid had much more pressing health concerns to begin with, so it’s not realistic to assume that all of them would have survived if they’d been vaccinated.