1 minute ago, BritManToo said:

MISINFORMATION, 

If the vaccines worked to reduce transmission it wouldn't be 50% of the new infections were fully vaccinated. If the claims were real it would be more like 10% vaccinated, 90% unvaccinated for new infections.

Stop, please.  You're helping no one.

4 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

MISINFORMATION, 

If the vaccines worked to reduce transmission it wouldn't be 50% of the new infections were fully vaccinated. If the claims were real it would be more like 10% vaccinated, 90% unvaccinated for new infections.

Another example of mathematical ineptitude. You don't take into account what percentage of the population is vaccinated. What's more, no one claims that vaccination is the only salient measure needed to control transmission. Social distancing and mask wearing are also important.

11 minutes ago, ignis said:

Appears NOT so. at least in the UK.  75 new cases of the  Covid Omicron, 50% found in the fully vaccinated

If 99% of a population is vaccinated, the number of vaccinated infecteds is going to be high, relatively speaking. Your internet friends have not given you the full story.

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You obviously don't get that we object to the mandates, rather than actions to reduce the spread. Some of us didn't elect governments to be dictators, and don't like it when they start being dictatorial.

Carrot always works better than the stick, but seems politicians forgot that.

So, purely political motive, ignore medical opinion.

The appropriate and right step. Anti-vaccine Karens and Darrens imperil the lives of a forward thinking, responsible and unselfish people. Danke vielmals, Frau Merkel. 

1 minute ago, mvdf said:

The appropriate and right step. Anti-vaccine Karens and Darrens imperil the lives of a forward thinking, responsible and unselfish people. Danke vielmals, Frau Merkel. 

Not only do I entirely agree with you, but i want to thank you for using 2 of the 10 words of German that I know. I feel so proud. of myself. Thank you many times.

,

40 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

MISINFORMATION, 

If the vaccines worked to reduce transmission it wouldn't be 50% of the new infections were fully vaccinated. If the claims were real it would be more like 10% vaccinated, 90% unvaccinated for new infections.

I suggest that you have made an incorrect conclusion from those stats.

 

Using simple figures to illustrate:

 

Population of 1,000,000

90% are vaccinated = 900,000 people

10% are not vaccinated = 100,000 people

There are 100,000 new infections in the total population, with 50% amongst the vaccinated and 50% amongst the unvaccinated

 

That means there are 50,000 new infections in each group.

 

50,000 new infections amongst the vaccinated is 5.5% of that group.

50,000 new infections amongst the unvaccinated is 50% of that group (nearly 10x more)

58 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

We should all remember that it's NOT all about covid, as much as some wish it were.

Spot on.

 

Just as every death - regardless of cause - isn't an equal tragedy on a societal level. The death of someone in their late 70s who's lived a full life is far less tragic than the death of a 5-year old from, say, conflict, malnutrition or malaria [U-5 mortality from malaria (2019) - est. 274,000 - https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/malaria]

 

Vaccination against Covid should be strongly encouraged by government, but not mandated - especially when long-term data on possible vaccination side effects in those currently at minimal risk of serious illness (healthy individuals aged under 40) is not available. There may be no significant side effects, but no-one can possibly know that at this point.

 

I greatly enjoyed spending last month in UK, going about my daily life without a mask. Since I was double-vaxxed effective early July, still caught Covid in late September (very mild symptoms), and had a further jab in UK in early Nov, I really didn't see why I should continue to wear a mask simply to make other people feel comfortable. By that reasoning, since one can never know whether another person presents a risk, we will all have to wear masks for ever. No thanks.

 

 

6 minutes ago, BKKBike09 said:

Spot on.

 

Just as every death - regardless of cause - isn't an equal tragedy on a societal level. The death of someone in their late 70s who's lived a full life is far less tragic than the death of a 5-year old from, say, conflict, malnutrition or malaria [U-5 mortality from malaria (2019) - est. 274,000 - https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/malaria]

 

Vaccination against Covid should be strongly encouraged by government, but not mandated - especially when long-term data on possible vaccination side effects in those currently at minimal risk of serious illness (healthy individuals aged under 40) is not available. There may be no significant side effects, but no-one can possibly know that at this point.

 

I greatly enjoyed spending last month in UK, going about my daily life without a mask. Since I was double-vaxxed effective early July, still caught Covid in late September (very mild symptoms), and had a further jab in UK in early Nov, I really didn't see why I should continue to wear a mask simply to make other people feel comfortable. By that reasoning, since one can never know whether another person presents a risk, we will all have to wear masks for ever. No thanks.

 

 

So you caught covid and were walking around without a mask infecting others?  And you think this is OK?  Unreal.

9 minutes ago, BKKBike09 said:

Vaccination against Covid should be strongly encouraged by government, but not mandated - especially when long-term data on possible vaccination side effects in those currently at minimal risk of serious illness (healthy individuals aged under 40) is not available. There may be no significant side effects, but no-one can possibly know that at this point.

Time and time again I've seen the issue of possible latent effects from a vaccination. To date, no vaccine has ever been show to produce latent effects. On the other hand there are several viral pathogens that do exactly that often with deadly consequences.. So the odds are that it's far more likely that infection with the covid virus will result in latent effects than would a covid vaccine.

1 hour ago, BritManToo said:

MISINFORMATION, 

If the vaccines worked to reduce transmission it wouldn't be 50% of the new infections were fully vaccinated. If the claims were real it would be more like 10% vaccinated, 90% unvaccinated for new infections.

The vaccines do work to reduce transmission. Not perfectly and not for long. We are going to need boosters every 6 - 9 months hopefully tweaked for latest variant, like flu shots. I believe this is what the data is showing around the world based on experiences of regions that achieved early high vaccination rates.    Masking and distancing must be permanent. 

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/03/well/live/covid-delta-variant-vaccine-symptoms.html#link-5e41b6c7

1 minute ago, Captain Monday said:

We are going to need boosters every 6 - 9 months hopefully tweaked for latest variant, like flu shots.

6-9 months seems optimistic, I thinking they'll insist on every 3 months.

8 minutes ago, Captain Monday said:

The vaccines do work to reduce transmission. Not perfectly and not for long. We are going to need boosters every 6 - 9 months hopefully tweaked for latest variant, like flu shots. I believe this is what the data is showing around the world based on experiences of regions that achieved early high vaccination rates.    Masking and distancing must be permanent. 

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/03/well/live/covid-delta-variant-vaccine-symptoms.html#link-5e41b6c7

That is not actually what the current data show. just because the 2nd shot declines in effectiveness after 4 to 6 months, that doesn't mean that a booster shot will do the same. A few small studies have been done that show a far more vigorous immune response after a booster than after a 2nd inoculation. Which is not at all surprising since there are several vaccines that require more than 2 inoculations to achieve full potency for the immune system. It's too early to conclude how long a booster will last.

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

That is not actually what the current data show. just because the 2nd shot declines in effectiveness after 4 to 6 months, that doesn't mean that a booster shot will do the same. A few small studies have been done that show a far more vigorous immune response after a booster than after a 2nd inoculation. Which is not at all surprising since there are several vaccines that require more than 2 inoculations to achieve full potency for the immune system. It's too early to conclude how long a booster will last.

I'll try to find the link, but just saw that in older people, >70, effectiveness actually increases after 9 months! 

 

We're still learning about this virus.  And the vaccines.

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

But it's not 90% of the entire population.

This getting so tedious. For the 5th time, I quoted the BBC verbatim (and 9 out of 10 = 90%). My original post also contained a reference and link to another article about adult super-spreader events (and the fact that the vast majority of attendees would have been vaxxed because 90% of the adult population had had at least 1 jab, and 80% of the adults had had 2 jabs).

 

To understand my comment one would have had to read the two halves of my post and to have read both links, something that no-one appears to have had the courtesy to do.

 

 

1 hour ago, BKKBike09 said:

Spot on.

 

Just as every death - regardless of cause - isn't an equal tragedy on a societal level. The death of someone in their late 70s who's lived a full life is far less tragic than the death of a 5-year old from, say, conflict, malnutrition or malaria [U-5 mortality from malaria (2019) - est. 274,000 - https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/malaria]

 

Vaccination against Covid should be strongly encouraged by government, but not mandated - especially when long-term data on possible vaccination side effects in those currently at minimal risk of serious illness (healthy individuals aged under 40) is not available. There may be no significant side effects, but no-one can possibly know that at this point.

 

I greatly enjoyed spending last month in UK, going about my daily life without a mask. Since I was double-vaxxed effective early July, still caught Covid in late September (very mild symptoms), and had a further jab in UK in early Nov, I really didn't see why I should continue to wear a mask simply to make other people feel comfortable. By that reasoning, since one can never know whether another person presents a risk, we will all have to wear masks for ever. No thanks.

 

 

Firstly you rationalize a scale of acceptability of the death of others then you go on to complain about the impact of wearing a mask on you personally.

 

And then you finish with this gem:

 

“I really didn't see why I should continue to wear a mask simply to make other people feel comfortable. By that reasoning, since one can never know whether another person presents a risk, we will all have to wear masks for ever. No thanks.”

 

Well equally one can never know if another person is vulnerable or not.

 

Wearing a mask is not ‘simply to make other people feel comfortable’, it’s a simple and effective means to help prevent the spread of this disease.

 

But of course for some  it’s an unacceptable inconvenience to consider others.

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

Time and time again I've seen the issue of possible latent effects from a vaccination. To date, no vaccine has ever been show to produce latent effects. On the other hand there are several viral pathogens that do exactly that often with deadly consequences.. So the odds are that it's far more likely that infection with the covid virus will result in latent effects than would a covid vaccine.

Latent effects are used by some as a straw man. How long do you need 7 billion doses have been given 10 years? One apoplectic hysterical guy told me he wants to know what the effects are "after 25 years"! He already hung his head down and took his jabs simply because  did not want to lose his job and visa.

42 minutes ago, blackprince said:

This getting so tedious. For the 5th time, I quoted the BBC verbatim (and 9 out of 10 = 90%). My original post also contained a reference and link to another article about adult super-spreader events (and the fact that the vast majority of attendees would have been vaxxed because 90% of the adult population had had at least 1 jab, and 80% of the adults had had 2 jabs).

 

To understand my comment one would have had to read the two halves of my post and to have read both links, something that no-one appears to have had the courtesy to do.

 

 

To claim, as you did, that despite the fact that despite the fact that a  90% vaccination level has been attained, the virus is still spreading  is obviously invalid.. The salient number is 68%. Are you seriously claiming that despite the fact that 68% of the population has been fully vaccinated, the virus is still spreading would be a valid point?

 

we should be reaching 100k Covid cases per day by next week in Europe if everything goes well ????

 

the wave should decline naturally by mid-December according to some COVID virus specialist on TV (no link, so don't start asking for one), no matter the silly measures governments will take this month (worthless at this stage, too late)

 

that still means hospitalization will be at max capacity until February,

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

To claim, as you did, that despite the fact that despite the fact that a  90% vaccination level has been attained, the virus is still spreading  is obviously invalid.. The salient number is 68%. Are you seriously claiming that despite the fact that 68% of the population has been fully vaccinated, the virus is still spreading would be a valid point?

 

oh please, could you stop with the pedant lecturing on every COVID replies that doesn't agree with your views?

 

the truth is nobody knows what's going on, including you ????

 

logic, and posturing lengthy articulations doesn't change the reality of the spread, no matter how articulate your arguments might sound

 

we need to accept that we don't know anything, and that the thing will have a life on its own, no matter what and how many booster shots we need. We have no idea how that thing is winning. Better get used to it.

1 minute ago, GrandPapillon said:

oh please, could you stop with the pedant lecturing on every COVID replies that doesn't agree with your views?

 

the truth is nobody knows what's going on, including you ????

 

logic, and posturing lengthy articulations doesn't change the reality of the spread, no matter how articulate your arguments might sound

 

we need to accept that we don't know anything, and that the thing will have a life on its own, no matter what and how many booster shots we need. We have no idea how that thing is winning. Better get used to it.

Oh, please, will you stop claiming that because researchers don't understand everything therefore that nothing is understood? There's plenty of research to back up what I say.

Yours is just a transparent ploy to spread disinformation.

And what definitively exposes your ploy for the transparent thing that it is, is that on the one hand you claim no one knows anything but on the other "that the thing will have a life on its own, no matter what and how many booster shots we need."

So, no one knows anything except you?

 

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

Oh, please, will you stop claiming that because researchers don't understand everything therefore that nothing is understood? There's plenty of research to back up what I say.

Yours is just a transparent ploy to spread disinformation.

And what definitively exposes your ploy for the transparent thing that it is, is that on the one hand you claim no one knows anything but on the other "that the thing will have a life on its own, no matter what and how many booster shots we need."

So, no one knows anything except you?

 

I think you are raving mad ????

 

you see misinformation everywhere, simply because you don't get the "validation" for your pedant lecturing

 

even the hard core virus "specialist" are starting to say they don't know "anything" about that thing. But somehow you claim you can because you are reading "every studies" out there. Guess what, studies are "opinionated" like everything else. Period.

 

There will be plenty of future studies that will "validate" or "deny" the current ones, so in short, it will be another 10 years or more before we know anything "solid"

 

for now, you are just speculating, with the illusion that the studies that you read are solid validated facts.

2 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

I think you are raving mad ????

 

you see misinformation everywhere, simply because you don't get the "validation" for your pedant lecturing

 

even the hard core virus "specialist" are starting to say they don't know "anything" about that thing. But somehow you claim you can because you are reading "every studies" out there. Guess what, studies are "opinionated" like everything else. Period.

 

There will be plenty of future studies that will "validate" or "deny" the current ones, so in short, it will be another 10 years or more before we know anything "solid"

 

for now, you are just speculating, with the illusion that the studies that you read are solid validated facts.

All I see you offer are attacks on characters and generalizations.

Tell me, who are the hard core specialist who are starting to say they don't know "anything" about that thing?

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

All I see you offer are attacks on characters and generalizations.

Tell me, who are the hard core specialist who are starting to say they don't know "anything" about that thing?

I don't think you are worthy to engage in any debate, too blind and too narrow minded. Just look at the history of your posts ????

 

and saying "we don't know anything" is not spreading misinformation ????

27 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

we should be reaching 100k Covid cases per day by next week in Europe if everything goes well ????

 

the wave should decline naturally by mid-December according to some COVID virus specialist on TV (no link, so don't start asking for one), no matter the silly measures governments will take this month (worthless at this stage, too late)

 

that still means hospitalization will be at max capacity until February,

There is no indication that the wave will decline by mid-December. Put up a link to prove it. Otherwise.....

3 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

I don't think you are worthy to engage in any debate, too blind and too narrow minded. Just look at the history of your posts ????

 

and saying "we don't know anything" is not spreading misinformation ????

As said by a covid denier.

5 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

So you caught covid and were walking around without a mask infecting others?  And you think this is OK?  Unreal.

No. Let me make it simple for you. I said: "I greatly enjoyed spending last month in UK, going about my daily life without a mask. Since I was double-vaxxed effective early July, still caught Covid in late September (very mild symptoms), and had a further jab in UK in early Nov ..."

 

Last month was November. I had positive LFTs on 23 and 26 September; I immediately self-isolated at home for 10 days. I then had negative PCR tests on 14 and 29 October. So me being unmasked in UK from 1-30 November presented zero risk to anyone, hence my lack of interest in wearing a mask simply to make other people feel better. Anyone that worried about catching Covid from other people should only wear a medical-grade N95/FFP2 mask, changed at least 2-3 daily, rather than a basic cloth covering or surgical mask pulled up and down numerous times during the day.

 

 

3 minutes ago, BKKBike09 said:

No. Let me make it simple for you. I said: "I greatly enjoyed spending last month in UK, going about my daily life without a mask. Since I was double-vaxxed effective early July, still caught Covid in late September (very mild symptoms), and had a further jab in UK in early Nov ..."

 

Last month was November. I had positive LFTs on 23 and 26 September; I immediately self-isolated at home for 10 days. I then had negative PCR tests on 14 and 29 October. So me being unmasked in UK from 1-30 November presented zero risk to anyone, hence my lack of interest in wearing a mask simply to make other people feel better. Anyone that worried about catching Covid from other people should only wear a medical-grade N95/FFP2 mask, changed at least 2-3 daily, rather than a basic cloth covering or surgical mask pulled up and down numerous times during the day.

 

 

You got infected and weren't wearing a mask. Classic way to infect others.

6 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

You got infected and weren't wearing a mask. Classic way to infect others.

Actually I was wearing a mask, where mandated, in Bangkok, which is where I caught Covid. I did take it off, of course, to eat in restaurants, which is likely where I caught it. 

 

Back to my original post: when I was in the UK subsequently I presented no risk to anyone and hence chose not to continue to wear a mask just to make other people feel 'comfortable'.

 

You and I clearly have very different views on all this, which at least makes for interesting debate.

 

 

1 hour ago, GrandPapillon said:

I don't think you are worthy to engage in any debate, too blind and too narrow minded. Just look at the history of your posts ????

 

and saying "we don't know anything" is not spreading misinformation ????

Well, I guess your post one way of waving the white flag. You've got nothing.