The vaccine is here. Now what?

295 posts / 0 new
Last post
NDPP

Canada's Challenges with Vaccination Rollout

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1839450179640/

"The provinces are behind targets of COVID-19 vaccine into Canadian arms...'Each province acts like a separate country.'

 

Aristotleded24

NDPP wrote:
Canada's Challenges with Vaccination Rollout

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1839450179640/

"The provinces are behind targets of COVID-19 vaccine into Canadian arms...'Each province acts like a separate country.'

Then I guess the vaccines won't be credited for ending the pandemic once this thing starts burning out in the next few monts. Some things just don't happen as planned.

JKR

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Then I guess the vaccines won't be credited for ending the pandemic once this thing starts burning out in the next few monts. Some things just don't happen as planned.

These conspiracy theories are getting tiresome.

Aristotleded24

JKR wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Then I guess the vaccines won't be credited for ending the pandemic once this thing starts burning out in the next few monts. Some things just don't happen as planned.

These conspiracy theories are getting tiresome.

Because the drug companies that make the vaccines would never try and capitalize on a public health crisis for profit?

JKR

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Because the drug companies that make the vaccines would never try and capitalize on a public health crisis for profit?

What is wrong with how drug companies from around the world have developed COVID-19 vaccines?

Aristotleded24

JKR wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Because the drug companies that make the vaccines would never try and capitalize on a public health crisis for profit?

What is wrong with how drug companies from around the world have developed COVID-19 vaccines?

They have done so in part at taxpayer expense, they have every incentive to rush the vaccine regardless of efficacy or safety, and they will profit enormously from the distribution. Something this big and this important should be done by governments in the public interests, not so a handful of drug companies can make massive profits.

Pondering

It should be publicly funded but it is not in the best interests of manufacturers to put out a product that fails or actively harms people. They had to meet all the same requirements. Just the red tape was pushed out of the way or dramatically speeded up. 

Aristotleded24

This is not good:

Quote:

The reports may indicate that common side effects from mRNA vaccines, such as fever and nausea, may have led to deaths in some frail patients” says Sigurd Hortemo, chief physician at the Norwegian Medicines Agency.

The agency reports:  

“As of 14 January, 23 reports of deaths have been reported to the adverse reaction register. The figures in the report itself include the thirteen reports that have been assessed by the Norwegian Medicines Agency and the National Institute of Public Health. The other messages are being processed.”

MegB

Pondering wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:
If they want the vaccine that is up to them. I'm guessing they want a number of other things (like decent, affordable housing) that will end up falling by the wayside and not happening once the  pandemic ends and we go "back to normal."

Yes, that is what I said. We should advocate for what they want not what we think they should have. 

Here here. 

MegB

JKR wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Then I guess the vaccines won't be credited for ending the pandemic once this thing starts burning out in the next few monts. Some things just don't happen as planned.

These conspiracy theories are getting tiresome.

I agree. There is no factual basis in supporting the idea that the virus will burn out in a matter of months. None whatsoever. There is however an abundance of evidence that people will die unnecessarily if the vaccine isn't delivered to as many people as possible as quickly as possible. 

I am not going to go on tolerating claims that cannot be substantiated on this issue. Aristotleded24, your views are well known. Others do not share them for clearly stated reasons. Enough is enough. 

NDPP

Canada will see a 'temporary' delay in supply of Pfizer vaccine shipments

https://twitter.com/i/events/1350100114535141377

"Pfizer will temporarily reduce deliveries of its COVID-19 vaccine to Canada, Public Services and Procurement Minister Anita Anand told reporters on Friday..."

earthquakefish

MegB wrote:
I see someone responding in feeling, very fairly in light of what is going on. 

I would suggest the one who said, 'these conspirarcy theories are getting tiresome' was misdirected, bordering slander.  But that's a take from someone not involved in this community.

 

JKR wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Then I guess the vaccines won't be credited for ending the pandemic once this thing starts burning out in the next few monts. Some things just don't happen as planned.

These conspiracy theories are getting tiresome.

I agree. There is no factual basis in supporting the idea that the virus will burn out in a matter of months. None whatsoever. There is however an abundance of evidence that people will die unnecessarily if the vaccine isn't delivered to as many people as possible as quickly as possible. 

I am not going to go on tolerating claims that cannot be substantiated on this issue. Aristotleded24, your views are well known. Others do not share them for clearly stated reasons. Enough is enough. 

earthquakefish

earthquakefish wrote:

MegB wrote:
I see someone responding in feeling, very fairly in light of what is going on. 

I would suggest the one who said, 'these conspirarcy theories are getting tiresome' was misdirected, bordering slander.  But that's a take from someone not involved in this community.

 

JKR wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Then I guess the vaccines won't be credited for ending the pandemic once this thing starts burning out in the next few monts. Some things just don't happen as planned.

These conspiracy theories are getting tiresome.

I agree. There is no factual basis in supporting the idea that the virus will burn out in a matter of months. None whatsoever. There is however an abundance of evidence that people will die unnecessarily if the vaccine isn't delivered to as many people as possible as quickly as possible. 

I am not going to go on tolerating claims that cannot be substantiated on this issue. Aristotleded24, your views are well known. Others do not share them for clearly stated reasons. Enough is enough. 

They don't even know if the new variants are affected by the vaccine, someone who expresses doubt, and *voices* it, is hardly one should be muzzled. If it's a life and death question, one should be able to come to their own conclusion in quesiton. That is life.

JKR

earthquakefish wrote:

I would suggest the one who said, 'these conspirarcy theories are getting tiresome' was misdirected, bordering slander.  But that's a take from someone not involved in this community.

Aristotleded24 stated that Pfizer is selling an ineffective vaccine because they know Covid-19 will die out by itself. I think this is obviously a dubious conspiracy theory. I personally find it tiresome and annoying to hear these kind of outlandish conspiracy theories in the numerous Covid threads started by a fellow Babbler. There are a bunch of apparent lies in this particular conspiracy theory. 1) That Pfizer thinks their vaccine is not effective. 2) That Pfizer thinks Covid-19 will die out by itself. 3) That COVID-19 will die out by itself. 4) That Pfizer would take the chance of acting in such an inept and criminal way. 5) That the whole world is stupid enough to be duped in such a way. I find it tiresome trying to spell out why I think this "theory" is bogus. I think if there was slander here it would be slander against Pfizer.

 

earthquakefish

JKR]</p> <p> </p> <p>I would suggest the one who said, 'these conspirarcy theories are getting tiresome' was misdirected, bordering slander.  But that's a take from someone not involved in this community.</p> <p>[quote wrote:

Aristotleded24 stated that Pfizer is selling an ineffective vaccine because they know Covid-19 will die out by itself. I think this is obviously a dubious conspiracy theory. I personally find it tiresome and annoying to hear these kind of outlandish conspiracy theories in the numerous Covid threads started by a fellow Babbler. There are a bunch of apparent lies in this particular conspiracy theory. 1) That Pfizer thinks their vaccine is not effective. 2) That Pfizer thinks Covid-19 will die out by itself. 3) That COVID-19 will die out by itself. 4) That Pfizer would take the chance of acting in such an inept and criminal way. 5) That the whole world is stupid enough to be duped in such a way. I find it tiresome trying to spell out why I think this "theory" is bogus. I think if there was slander here it would be slander against Pfizer.

There is no reason to believe Pfizer would promise something like that.  There is benefit for them, with countries up bidding the cost of vaccines, and then a day later speaking of supply in manufacturing difficulties. Profit. Isreal boasted, just days ago, of offering more for dosages.  It is the first major health issue in so long, would a company not try to benefit?

It was developed quickly, yes I know from technologoy existing before, where this is the first chance to really try implementing, but something stinks.  Even media said when it showed up in Ontario, the police were there protecting it like it was liquid gold. It really is that, and you don't need pent up driven demand now for that to see.

Pfiszer is not without scrutiny, question? You really don't think a pharma company would hold countires hostage, now?  Call me slanderous, but they want it that way. I don't see how Aristotled24 was slandering a pharma company and instead I see one askin *questions*

eastnoireast

earthquakefish wrote:

Pfiszer is not without scrutiny, question? You really don't think a pharma company would hold countires hostage, now?  Call me slanderous, but they want it that way. I don't see how Aristotled24 was slandering a pharma company and instead I see one askin *questions*

exactly.  asking annoying, at times spammy, broad-brush questions; but we are in an annoying, spammy, broad-brush info-pandemic.

without a24, eqf, and myself, the rabble discussion boards are pretty well a "more lockdown/censor/vacine-warshiping/i've-made-up-my-mind" echo chamber regarding c19.

the left.  pfftt.

NorthReport

And hopefully we will make scientific progress on how the spread of Covid-19 happened

The other virus that worries Asia

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210106-nipah-virus-how-bats-could-c...

NorthReport

What a challenge for scientists to get the actual truth out in both China and the USA. And what a shame for which we all pay a price!

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/china-builds-hospital-days-surge...

earthquakefish

You can get the truth out of Canada, Europe, Russia, Australia, South America, Africa?  You are letting the new cold war affect what you trust.

 

NorthReport wrote:
What a challenge for scientists to get the actual truth out in both China and the USA. And what a shame for which we all pay a price! https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/china-builds-hospital-days-surge...

NDPP

'Catastrophically Wrong': German court declares regional lockdown UNCONSTITUTIONAL in 'politically explosive' decision

https://on.rt.com/b06b

"Thuringia's spring lockdown was a catastrophically wrong political decision with dramatic consequences for almost all areas of people's lives,' the court said, justifying its decision..."

Interesting.

Aristotleded24

Anyone who thinks that the vaccine is going to be a ticket out of the pandemic is in for a rude awakening. Let's consider the UK and Chile.

By any objective measure, the crisis is over in the UK. The pandemic has run its course, infections and fatalities are very low, and the UK has been very successful in vaccinating its population. So why is it still slow to come out of lockdown, with the government hinting that restrictions will persist into the summer?

Chile is even more revealing, in that they also recently experienced new heights amid a relatively successful rollout of the vaccine. Why is that significant? Chile is right now in their winter/flu season, when the incidence of respiratory illness can be expected to increase. They also went through a full cycle of covid last year, so there should be some built-up immunity in the population. Even as viruses mutate into new variants, a respiratory illness left to its own devices means the first wave should be the one that hits harder. So why did this current wave go even higher? Notice that the vaccine rollout in Canada is happening when the incidence of respiratory illness generally goes down anyways. As for re-opening? Alberta might reopen all the way because they came out with a plan dependent on the number of hospitalizations. I don't expect any other province to get to the equivalent of Manitoba's green level. We'll have more events cancelled, and be told of more waves. My prediction is that come October, we will have an even higher surge in cases, more talks about "vaccine resistant variants," lockdowns, more mask mandates, we need a new vaccine (Pheizer has already said we will need booster shots, so expect the other companies to follow suit) and restrictions imposed on people who either aren't vaccinated or up-to-date with their shots. (Count on this new protocol not accepting valid medical exemptions from the vaccine, as drug and IT companies won't make any money that way.)

Vaccines should be a tool for freedom, but the covid vaccine is going to be used to further control our behaviours. The requirement to be vaccinated for covid in as a condition for evacuation from the St. Vincent volcano foreshadows the world we are hurtling towards: priviledges for people who are vaccinated, and exclusion of those who are not. If this reality comes to pass, it will be in large part thanks to the left repeating the big pharma talking point that only a vaccine will end the pandemic.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

That annoying buzzing noise is back. It was a relief not to be forced to listen to it for a while, but now here it is again.

 

Pondering

The patents on vaccines should be lifted as they were developed with government money. 

We need booster shots yearly for the flu as well. The flu is way down this year because it is less virulent than covid so the measures we are taking is enough to stop it if not covid. 

A vaccinated person can still catch and transmit covid. They are just less likely to catch it and more rarely still to end up hospitalized or dead. 

To reach herd immunity which isn't 100% requires somewhere around 75% of the population to be vaccinated or more. 

China is open. There is no reason the rest of the world didn't follow other than greedy capitalists who refused to do a lockdown and still refuse to do a lockdown. 

At this point we would need a hard lockdown, China style, for 2 months to stop covid and even then we would have to keep our borders closed to the world. Vaccines are our only hope now. 

Yes, viruses do eventually burn out on their own. Don't see the black plague around anymore do you?   The issue is that lots of people die first. 

For all the weird spots where covid has not become as rampant as expected there are other places like India where it is behaving true to form. 

It's about risk management not guarantees. 

kropotkin1951

I got my shot last week although I have never gotten a flu shot because I never get the flu. I do get cold viruses occasionally but none of them have ever had the potential to kill me or leave me in extremely compromised health for the rest of my years.

I note that all the tests show that although I still have a risk of contracting a new COVID strain I am now almost certainly not going to be hospitalized or die from this virus.

kropotkin1951

Pondering wrote:

China is open. There is no reason the rest of the world didn't follow other than greedy capitalists who refused to do a lockdown and still refuse to do a lockdown.

I watch a lot of videos made by ex-pats from around the world who live and work in China. The local city and regional authorities across the country are the ones setting the COVID rules and restrictions. So in some cities hardly anyone has masks on because they are not required. In most cities they are only recommended. Most people follow the recommendations but it is clear that not everyone does. The big difference was a year ago they shut down all the regions with cases of the virus simultaneously for a long enough period that the virus had no place to go and died out locally. They now have extremely strict quarantine rules for anyone going into the country.

 

JKR

Michael Moriarity wrote:

That annoying buzzing noise is back. It was a relief not to be forced to listen to it for a while, but now here it is again.

 

I think it would be also be much better if all these Covid threads were limited to one thread like the one titled, "Coronavirus: what Canadians need to know"

Aristotleded24

Michael Moriarity wrote:
That annoying buzzing noise is back. It was a relief not to be forced to listen to it for a while, but now here it is again.

I know. That's actually my furnace. I plan to get that looked at next week.

Aristotleded24

I know I said I wouldn't actively engage on babble anymore, but some items have gone unchallenged for too long.

Pondering wrote:
China is open. There is no reason the rest of the world didn't follow other than greedy capitalists who refused to do a lockdown and still refuse to do a lockdown.

This can be dissected on many levels. Let's take the claim at face value first. As we are told, China had a coronavirus outbreak, they had the lockdown, and the cases dropped. How do we know that the lockdown itself was the cause? This outbreak happened in December 2019-January 2020, at the time that most of the Northern Hemisphere experiences outbreaks of seasonal respiratory viruses. How can we be certain that the drop-off in cases wasn't that the virus merely ran its course? South Dakota had a coronavirus outbreak in October-November 2020. There were no mask mandates, social disancing, business closures, the state remained open, and the cases fell off rapidly on their own. The virus is effectively gone from South Dakota, and unlike places like Michigan, Ontario, and Quebec in the same general lattitude, did not experience a secondary surge in the spring.

Now let's break apart the claim itself. Apparently what happened is that the virus broke out in China. During this time, there are images of people dropping dead in the streets. Thanks to the lockdowns, China gets the virus under control. It effectively goes away, the place is free to open up, and China's economy experiences massive growth.

That success story was not repeated anywhere else in the world. In most countries, the virus came back and closely resembled the seasonal patterns of respiratory virus outbreaks that normally occur. Australia tried very hard to imitate China's lockdowns during its normal 2020 flu season, yet the virus continued to rise, peak, and fall in line with the seasonal respiratory illness pattern. I'm stunned that Australia is continually cited as a covid success story because of lockdowns. If the lockdown was so successful, why did Melbourne have to endure a secondary lockdown? Why do cities remain on edge, waiting to be locked down with the detection of a few cases? Not only that, but lockdowns have been economically devastating, not to mention the social collateral damage.  That's just in the developed world. Lockdowns in poorer countries resulted in economic destruction and chaos far worse than the worst unchecked spread of the virus ever could. Furthermore, while there were cases throughout the world of hospitals coming under strain, the phenomenon of "bodies dropping in the street" simply did not happen anywhere else in the world.

So why is China's experience so unique in this respect? Remember that lockdowns as pandemic responses are unprecedented. Not only does the 2019 WHO Pandemic Plan recommend against them, but they would not have even been on the table had the virus been discovered in any other country.

So what's going on? Remember those images I mentioned upthread, that started showing up in our social media feeds? Most of the social media platforms we use are either banned or tightly regulated in China. China is also a closed authoritarian state, and almost every media image out of China we see has been approved by the government. I find it highly unlikely that those images were the result of people just randomly walking by and catching video. Could those pictures have been staged? In order to accept the lockdown narrative, you have to accept that things played out in China as I described. Given the nature of China's authoritarian governnment, to call me skeptical of that claim is putting it mildly.

Pondering wrote:
The patents on vaccines should be lifted as they were developed with government money. 

...

At this point we would need a hard lockdown, China style, for 2 months to stop covid and even then we would have to keep our borders closed to the world. Vaccines are our only hope now.

This is dangerously naieve. Bill Gates invested a great deal of money in vaccines, and now he is in a position to reap the rewards. Why would he give that up? Maybe he "should," but the reality is that he is the one who is in a position of power, and all the begging and pleading in the world is not going to change that. When the idea that only a vaccine could save us from coronavirus gained traction, what did you think was going to happen? That specific idea appears to have originated with Dr. Fauci, and unfortunately went unchallenged. Not only that, but even discussion of possible cheap, early treatments was villified. (Look at the shrill tone surrounding the discussion around HCQ.) By accepting the framework that only a vaccine can save us, you set the stage for people like Gates to get rich and cash in off a health crisis. Why is anybody surprised?

NorthReport

Yes, and we all know the lunar landing was a staged hoax as well.   

Ari, give it a break, and stop trying to mislead people with your pandemic Looney Tunes, which could do them and many others, serious harm.

One giant ... lie? Why so many people still think the moon landings were faked

Buzz Aldrin descends from the lunar module.

Buzz Aldrin descends from the lunar module. Photograph: Allstar Picture Library

It all started with a man called Bill Kaysing and his pamphlet about ‘America’s $30bn swindle’ ...

Still, while irritating for those involved – Buzz Aldrin punched moon conspiracist Bart Sibrel in 2002 – in one sense the conspiracy idea is harmless, at least compared with misinformation about vaccinations or mass murders.

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/jul/10/one-giant-lie-why-so-man...

Aristotleded24

This is very troubling:

Quote:
But herd immunity is slipping away because a quarter of Americans are refusing to get the COVID-19 vaccine. “There is no eradication at this point, it’s off the table," Dr. Gregory Poland, director of the Mayo Clinic's Vaccine Research Group, recently said. "We as a society have rejected” herd immunity. 

...

But herd immunity is slipping away because a quarter of Americans are refusing to get the COVID-19 vaccine. “There is no eradication at this point, it’s off the table," Dr. Gregory Poland, director of the Mayo Clinic's Vaccine Research Group, recently said. "We as a society have rejected” herd immunity. 

Hmm, no! “We” have not rejected anything. A quarter of the country is ruining it for all of us.

...

Biden’s wildly successful vaccine rollout means that soon everyone who wants a vaccine will have one. When that happens, restaurants, movie theaters, gyms, barbers, airlines and Ubers should require proof of vaccination before providing their services.

And it shouldn’t stop there. Businesses should make vaccination a requirement for employment. A COVID-19 outbreak can shut down a business and be financially devastating. And failure to enforce basic health and safety measures is not fair to employees who have to work in offices, factories and stores where close contact is required. Things should get personal, too: People should require friends to be vaccinated to attend the barbecues and birthday parties they host. Friends don’t let friends spread the coronavirus.

When in history has creating entire categories of people to be shunned and excluded from life ever had a good outcome? And this guy is a doctor. I thought doctors were supposed to help people maintain optimal health?

Aristotleded24

This is an interesting development:

Quote:
A private school founded by an anti-vaccination activist in South Florida has warned teachers and staff against taking the COVID-19 vaccine, saying it will not employ anyone who has received the shot.

The Centner Academy in Miami sent a notice to parents on Monday informing them of a new policy for its two campuses for about 300 students from pre-kindergarten through eighth grade. Teachers or staff who have already taken the vaccine were told to continue reporting to school but to stay separated from students.

There are other instances of businesses announcing that they will refuse service to people with the covid vaccine. The justification is one of safety. The claim is that vaccinated people will either shed immune-resistant variants or spike protiens themselves and the unvaccinated will be exposed to the health risk. Some have suggested that vaccinated people will continue to make the spike protien and shed from their body forever. Others have suggested that after some time, the mRNA breaks down and that process ends. Who is right? I'm not in a position to evaluate, however I don't trust that either the vaccine manufacturers nor the regulators assuring us of safety have the public's best interest in mind.

I wonder if this idea is in reaction to very serious proposals to restrict people's access to things like travel, cultural events, etc if they don't get the vaccine. For the pearl-clutching over this proposal, it is not nearly as dangerous as the proposed vaccine passports that, on the current trajectory, will control every aspect of your life.

Aristotleded24

A Canadian doctor weighs in on vaccine safety:

Quote:
In this letter the public health officer has rejected ALL five of my reports of serious adverse events submitted to them. All the pts were also advised that these are not considered adverse events and therefore were not advised to refrain from getting 2nd dose Very concerning

Pondering

Australia is a success story because the measure of success is not total eradication even if it is the goal. The maritimes are also a success story. Success is getting it down enough that most people can go about their normal lifes while hotspots are addressed. 

For the rest of Canada keeping the hospitals from collapsing is considered success.

It's wonderful that in some rare places Covid has not run rampant without restrictions and there is no guarantee they will stay that way. There are other factors involved. 

There is no question that this is an airborne virus that is deadly enough to overwhelm hospitals. We go by what is happening in Canada and in local communities not what is happening in Texas. 

In Canada restrictions have been shown to be the only means of stopping the virus.

People have every right to refuse the vaccine but other people have every right to shun those who do because they are making a choice that we have collectively decided presents a risk to others.

I'm sure you have heard "Your Liberty To Swing Your Fist Ends Just Where My Nose Begins".  I have a right to be safe from people who are refusing to be vaccinated.  My freedoms should not be limited by them because they are making a choice that endangers the health of others. 

 

 

Aristotleded24

Here are some questions about the logic surrounding the current vaccination campaigns that need to be answered.

If you feel the need to be vaccinated, and the vaccines work, why do you care if anyone else takes the vaccine or not?

Given that children and adolescents have a very low risk from covid, why is there a massive push to vaccinate in this age group?

Why is there a push to vaccinate pregnant women? Impact on fertility is one of the major questions about any pharmeceutical intervention, and we simply have not had enough time to properly assess this risk in particular, especially since vaccine roll-outs began with much older age groups?

Regardless of the overall success of the vaccination program, in almost every industrialized country, all elderly and vulnerable who want the vaccine have had a chance to get it. Why wasn't that enough to ease lockdowns in the UK?

If a majority of people choose to be vaccinated, why must that choice be enforced with a vaccine passport that limits privlieges of people who are not vaccinated? Surely that widespread vaccination on its own would protect against major health harms from the virus?

There are many other health issues that are pressing, in particular in developing countries. We also know that certain segments of the population have higher risk than others. Is this massive campaign of trying to vaccinate everybody diverting resources from other concerns?

Have we forgotten that mass vaccination campaigns during active disease outbreaks has often caused problems down the road? Anyone remember the swine flu fiasco of 1976?

Aristotleded24

Pondering wrote:
The maritimes are also a success story.

That's true. They beat covid last year and haven't looked back since:

Quote:
Nova Scotia reported a new daily high of 182 cases of COVID-19 on Thursday, for a total of 1,309 active cases in the province.

Aristotleded24

Vaccine adverse events continue to set records in the United States since the rollout of the vaccine:

Quote:

Data released today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on the number of injuries and deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) following COVID vaccines confirmed that numbers are still rising, but no new trends emerged.

VAERS is the primary mechanism for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed.

Every Friday, VAERS makes public all vaccine injury reports received to the system for the previous week. Today’s data show that between Dec. 14, 2020 and April 1, a total of 56,869 total adverse events were reported to VAERS, including 2,342 deaths — an increase of 93 over the previous week — and 7,971 serious injuries, up 245 over the same time period.

Note this is just data from early April. Many more reports have continued to come in, but this was the most up-to-date user-friendly record I could find.

Aristotleded24

So then what is the point of the vaccination then, Dr. Tam?

Quote:

Canada's chief public health officer reminded Canadians on Saturday that even those who are fully vaccinated remain susceptible to COVID-19.

Speaking at a virtual townhall for Yukoners, Dr. Theresa Tam said the risk of asymptomatic infection and transmission is far lower for anyone who receives two shots of the Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, or Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines.

"But it's not absolute. There's reduction in your risk of transmission, but it doesn't necessarily eliminate your risk of transmission," Tam said, adding that the danger dials down especially after the second dose.

Then what is the point? Our lives have been disrupted and on hold for over a year, and we were told that only a vaccine would be back to normal. Is she trying to prime us to accept things like mask requirements, lockdowns, business capacity limits, and social distancing into the indefinite future even after we are all vaccinated?

Aristotleded24
Bacchus

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Here are some questions about the logic surrounding the current vaccination campaigns that need to be answered.

If you feel the need to be vaccinated, and the vaccines work, why do you care if anyone else takes the vaccine or not?

Given that children and adolescents have a very low risk from covid, why is there a massive push to vaccinate in this age group?

Why is there a push to vaccinate pregnant women? Impact on fertility is one of the major questions about any pharmeceutical intervention, and we simply have not had enough time to properly assess this risk in particular, especially since vaccine roll-outs began with much older age groups?

Regardless of the overall success of the vaccination program, in almost every industrialized country, all elderly and vulnerable who want the vaccine have had a chance to get it. Why wasn't that enough to ease lockdowns in the UK?

If a majority of people choose to be vaccinated, why must that choice be enforced with a vaccine passport that limits privlieges of people who are not vaccinated? Surely that widespread vaccination on its own would protect against major health harms from the virus?

There are many other health issues that are pressing, in particular in developing countries. We also know that certain segments of the population have higher risk than others. Is this massive campaign of trying to vaccinate everybody diverting resources from other concerns?

Have we forgotten that mass vaccination campaigns during active disease outbreaks has often caused problems down the road? Anyone remember the swine flu fiasco of 1976?

 

Well, for one thing, doctors have stated that even vaccinated you can still be a carrier

 

Aristotleded24

Spencer Fernando on vaccine passports:

Quote:

This idea, taking away freedom to ‘give it back’ in ‘exchange’ for doing what the government wants you to do, was summed up by a public health professor speaking on CNN:

“A “medical analyst” on Cuomo Primetime says that states should not reopen because it’s easier to control people when they can’t enjoy their freedoms:”

Look at the argument she’s making here.

First, she talks of “we” and “them,” separating herself from the general public as if it’s her job to tell people what to do.

Second, she laments that the ‘window’ to use the vaccine as a ‘ticket back to pre-pandemic life’ is ‘narrowing,’ as states in the US reopen. Rather than being glad that people are getting back to normal, she’s upset that the situation can’t be manipulated.

Third, she straight up says ‘reopening policy’ must be ‘tied to vaccination status.’ Note how she isn’t even talking here about the broader issue of health, it’s simply a lament of the loss of control over people.

Fourth, she is saying that the incentive for people to get their freedom back is to get the vaccine, and laments how ‘people are going to go out and enjoy these freedoms anyway.’ Yes, heaven forbid people enjoy the freedoms they previously had and are supposedly guaranteed to them.

...

As you saw in the video above, a very controlling and authoritarian attitude lurks behind much of this, and the change in the definition of herd immunity feeds into the desire of those who want expanded power.

Exactly. For the government to say, "you need to be vaccinated before we open up" is about control and coercion, not public health.

Pondering

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Pondering wrote:
The maritimes are also a success story.

That's true. They beat covid last year and haven't looked back since:

Quote:
Nova Scotia reported a new daily high of 182 cases of COVID-19 on Thursday, for a total of 1,309 active cases in the province.

Right, so they will shut down the affected area and get it back under control. Then they reopen. Just like Australia. This is what we expect to happen. In all likelihood Covid is never ever going to be eradicated and there will be more emerging over the coming years. 

Restrictions are to slow the spread not stop it. Success is measured by hospitals not being overwhelmed. 

Pondering

Aristotleded24 wrote:

So then what is the point of the vaccination then, Dr. Tam?

Quote:

Canada's chief public health officer reminded Canadians on Saturday that even those who are fully vaccinated remain susceptible to COVID-19.

Speaking at a virtual townhall for Yukoners, Dr. Theresa Tam said the risk of asymptomatic infection and transmission is far lower for anyone who receives two shots of the Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, or Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines.

"But it's not absolute. There's reduction in your risk of transmission, but it doesn't necessarily eliminate your risk of transmission," Tam said, adding that the danger dials down especially after the second dose.

Then what is the point? Our lives have been disrupted and on hold for over a year, and we were told that only a vaccine would be back to normal. Is she trying to prime us to accept things like mask requirements, lockdowns, business capacity limits, and social distancing into the indefinite future even after we are all vaccinated?

No, from what I have heard 80% coverage will allow reopening. Having said that we should be prepared for more pandemics caused by human interaction with other animals displaced by development and climate change. 

Concerning your opinion about what "the left" should be doing. The "left" is more concerned with collective rights, classes of people, than individual rights. Individual rights serve the powerful. 

Pondering

Aristotleded24 wrote:
   If you feel the need to be vaccinated, and the vaccines work, why do you care if anyone else takes the vaccine or not?   

I care about protecting everyone not just myself. Even if I didn't care about everyone else overloaded hospitals impact me if I need health care.  If people are really determined not to get vaccinated I would be okay with their waiving their right to health care. 

Aristotleded24 wrote:
  Given that children and adolescents have a very low risk from covid, why is there a massive push to vaccinate in this age group?    

Because they are carriers and low risk is not no risk. We are discovering that aside from death there are longterm consequences on multiple organs including the brain and heart for significant numbers of people. As long as it is circulating varients are continuing to develop that could be resistant to all of our treatments and vaccines. 

Aristotleded24 wrote:
 

Why is there a push to vaccinate pregnant women? Impact on fertility is one of the major questions about any pharmeceutical intervention, and we simply have not had enough time to properly assess this risk in particular, especially since vaccine roll-outs began with much older age groups?    

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/preg...

The overall risk of COVID-19 to pregnant women is low. However, pregnancy increases the risk for severe illness and death with COVID-19. Pregnant women who have COVID-19 appear more likely to develop respiratory complications requiring intensive care than women who aren't pregnant, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Pregnant women are also more likely to be placed on a ventilator.

In addition, pregnant women who are Black or Hispanic appear to be disproportionately affected by infection with the COVID-19 virus. Pregnant women who have underlying medical conditions, such as diabetes, also might be at even higher risk of severe illness due to COVID-19.

Some research suggests that pregnant women with COVID-19 are also more likely to have a premature birth and cesarean delivery, and their babies are more likely to be admitted to a neonatal unit.

Aristotleded24 wrote:
  Regardless of the overall success of the vaccination program, in almost every industrialized country, all elderly and vulnerable who want the vaccine have had a chance to get it. Why wasn't that enough to ease lockdowns in the UK?    

Because elderly and vulnerable are most at risk does not mean other people are not at risk. 

Aristotleded24 wrote:
  If a majority of people choose to be vaccinated, why must that choice be enforced with a vaccine passport that limits privlieges of people who are not vaccinated? Surely that widespread vaccination on its own would protect against major health harms from the virus?    

No it wouldn't. It takes much more than the majority. The more it circulates the greater the risk of varients developing that we can't control. If people do not want to do their civic duty they can go live with other people who feel the same way including health care providers. 

Aristotleded24 wrote:
   There are many other health issues that are pressing, in particular in developing countries. We also know that certain segments of the population have higher risk than others. Is this massive campaign of trying to vaccinate everybody diverting resources from other concerns?   

Yes, massively. Not vaccinating as many people as humanly possible would divert even more resources as they would be sucked up treating people who have Covid 19.

Aristotleded24 wrote:
  Have we forgotten that mass vaccination campaigns during active disease outbreaks has often caused problems down the road? Anyone remember the swine flu fiasco of 1976? 

I don't but it doesn't matter. There are no absolutes. We are gambling. We know that Covid could turn into a worldwide black plague if we don't get it under control. That is why there is so much concern over under-developed countries. They could incubate even more deadly varients that would then escape into developed countries. 

I'm vaccinated. I will get my second dose by July 4th. I have not changed my behavior because I don't just want to avoid the hospital or death. I don't want to get it at all. Non-hospitalized people still get very sick and could potentially become long-haulers. Setting aside self-interest I don't want to be Typhoid Mary. 

Living within a tribe carries responsibilities to the collective. If you pose a risk to the collective you will be shunned. Now there is an alternative to being shunned. Vaccination. 

Aristotleded24

Pondering wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:
   If you feel the need to be vaccinated, and the vaccines work, why do you care if anyone else takes the vaccine or not?   

I care about protecting everyone not just myself. Even if I didn't care about everyone else overloaded hospitals impact me if I need health care.  If people are really determined not to get vaccinated I would be okay with their waiving their right to health care. 

Aristotleded24 wrote:
  Given that children and adolescents have a very low risk from covid, why is there a massive push to vaccinate in this age group?    

Because they are carriers and low risk is not no risk. We are discovering that aside from death there are longterm consequences on multiple organs including the brain and heart for significant numbers of people. As long as it is circulating varients are continuing to develop that could be resistant to all of our treatments and vaccines. 

Aristotleded24 wrote:
 

Why is there a push to vaccinate pregnant women? Impact on fertility is one of the major questions about any pharmeceutical intervention, and we simply have not had enough time to properly assess this risk in particular, especially since vaccine roll-outs began with much older age groups?    

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/preg...

The overall risk of COVID-19 to pregnant women is low. However, pregnancy increases the risk for severe illness and death with COVID-19. Pregnant women who have COVID-19 appear more likely to develop respiratory complications requiring intensive care than women who aren't pregnant, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Pregnant women are also more likely to be placed on a ventilator.

In addition, pregnant women who are Black or Hispanic appear to be disproportionately affected by infection with the COVID-19 virus. Pregnant women who have underlying medical conditions, such as diabetes, also might be at even higher risk of severe illness due to COVID-19.

Some research suggests that pregnant women with COVID-19 are also more likely to have a premature birth and cesarean delivery, and their babies are more likely to be admitted to a neonatal unit.

Aristotleded24 wrote:
  Regardless of the overall success of the vaccination program, in almost every industrialized country, all elderly and vulnerable who want the vaccine have had a chance to get it. Why wasn't that enough to ease lockdowns in the UK?    

Because elderly and vulnerable are most at risk does not mean other people are not at risk. 

Aristotleded24 wrote:
  If a majority of people choose to be vaccinated, why must that choice be enforced with a vaccine passport that limits privlieges of people who are not vaccinated? Surely that widespread vaccination on its own would protect against major health harms from the virus?    

No it wouldn't. It takes much more than the majority. The more it circulates the greater the risk of varients developing that we can't control. If people do not want to do their civic duty they can go live with other people who feel the same way including health care providers. 

Aristotleded24 wrote:
   There are many other health issues that are pressing, in particular in developing countries. We also know that certain segments of the population have higher risk than others. Is this massive campaign of trying to vaccinate everybody diverting resources from other concerns?   

Yes, massively. Not vaccinating as many people as humanly possible would divert even more resources as they would be sucked up treating people who have Covid 19.

Aristotleded24 wrote:
  Have we forgotten that mass vaccination campaigns during active disease outbreaks has often caused problems down the road? Anyone remember the swine flu fiasco of 1976? 

I don't but it doesn't matter. There are no absolutes. We are gambling. We know that Covid could turn into a worldwide black plague if we don't get it under control. That is why there is so much concern over under-developed countries. They could incubate even more deadly varients that would then escape into developed countries. 

I'm vaccinated. I will get my second dose by July 4th. I have not changed my behavior because I don't just want to avoid the hospital or death. I don't want to get it at all. Non-hospitalized people still get very sick and could potentially become long-haulers. Setting aside self-interest I don't want to be Typhoid Mary. 

Living within a tribe carries responsibilities to the collective. If you pose a risk to the collective you will be shunned. Now there is an alternative to being shunned. Vaccination. 

Sounds like you would feel comfortable in a place like Israel:

Quote:

Part of a program dubbed Operation Back to Life , the “Green Pass” system restricts entry to registered gyms, theaters, hotels, restaurants, universities and secondary schools to holders of scannable vaccine passport only.

“This is the first step back to an almost normal life,” Israeli Health Minister Yuli Edelstein said at a briefing about the program which began rolling out last week.

The Israeli government announced a number of new rules on March 6 in a statement released jointly by the Prime Minister’s Office, the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Transportation. The government paper will be in effect until the next government review on March 20.

“This is the first step back to an almost normal life,” Israeli Health Minister Yuli Edelstein said at a briefing about the program which began rolling out last week.

There's more:

Quote:

Israel has managed to vaccinate nearly 4.2 million people with a first dose—that’s around 50 percent of the population—and 2.8 million people with the full two doses, more than 30 percent of the population.

Meanwhile, only several thousand doses are available in the Palestinian West Bank, and a delivery of 20,000 reported to have arrived last weekend in Gaza scarcely scratches at the surface of the needs. At a generous maximum, assuming that the 35,000 reported Sputnik and Moderna vaccines are all available, that would be around 0.8 percent of the Palestinian population.

To make that clearer, you are over 60 times more likely to have a vaccination in Israel than in Palestine. According to the Geneva Conventions, Israel has a responsibility as an occupying power to ensure the medical supplies of the occupied population, including “adoption and application of the prophylactic and preventative measures necessary to combat the spread of contagious diseases and epidemics” to “the fullest extent of the means available to it.”

So there are ways for societies to handle people it considers internal threats.

Aristotleded24

More on the relative risks and benefits of covid vaccines for children:

Quote:
The rapid development of highly effective covid-19 vaccines is a triumph of science and, with equitable implementation strategies, represents humanity’s path out of this pandemic. To expedite deployment in the United States, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) provided three covid-19 vaccines with emergency use authorization while they concurrently went through the traditional review process. Pfizer has asked the FDA to amend the existing emergency use authorization for its vaccine to allow eligibility for children aged 12 to 15. Further clinical trials of covid-19 vaccines, including for younger children, are underway. Unlike for adults, however, the likelihood of severe outcomes or death associated with covid-19 infection is very low for children, undermining the appropriateness of an emergency use authorization for child covid-19 vaccines.

Emergency use authorization in the US requires that an intervention address a serious or life threatening condition, and for known and potential benefits of the intervention to be balanced against the known and potential harms. The emergency use authorizations for covid-19 vaccines were implemented at the height of the second wave in the US, enabling around 100 million American adults, who would otherwise be at significant risk of severe outcomes or death from covid-19 infection, to be vaccinated on an accelerated time frame.

Significant adverse events to vaccines are sometimes detected during wider distribution; for example, such events were investigated for the Johnson & Johnson covid-19 vaccine.  But phase III trials of covid-19 vaccines in adults have demonstrated reductions in both infections and severe disease, and even if one reasoned conservatively from data on infections alone, these trials showed a large benefit for adult populations that convincingly offset the potential for harms from any side effects rare enough to be missed in phase III trials. Collectively, covid-19 vaccination in adults met emergency use authorization criteria given the positive balance of risks and benefits at the individual level.

Trials for covid-19 vaccines are also underway for children as young as 6 months. These trials are not powered to measure decreases in severe covid-19 infections, due to their rarity in this age group. Instead, these trials are examining safety, the immune response, and, as a secondary outcome, the impact on the incidence of covid-19 infections. As for adults, these trials are not designed to assess rare or delayed adverse events. Unlike for adults, the rarity of severe covid-19 outcomes for children means that trials cannot demonstrate that the balance of the benefits of vaccination against the potential adverse effects are favorable to the children themselves. In short, given the rarity of severe clinical courses and limited clarity of risks, the criteria for emergency use authorization do not appear to be met for children.

Question for legal people: if a school or workplace mandates a covid vaccine, and the person who takes it ends up with serious health complications as a result of said vaccine, can that entity be sued?

Aristotleded24
Aristotleded24

What is anti-body dependent enhancement?

Quote:
ADE occurs when the antibodies generated during an immune response recognize and bind to a pathogen, but they are unable to prevent infection. Instead, these antibodies act as a “Trojan horse,” allowing the pathogen to get into cells and exacerbate the immune response.

JKR

Uber and Lyft to provide free rides to vaccination sites as part of new White House partnership

----------------

U.S. President Joe Biden is set to announce additional steps toward promoting vaccine accessibility, including free rides on Uber and Lyft to vaccination sites, to help meet the administration's goal of 70 per cent of adults getting at least one coronavirus shot by July 4.

Uber and Lyft will provide free rides to and from vaccination sites until July 4 as part of a new partnership with the White House, a White House official told CNN. White House COVID-19 response coordinator Jeff Zients detailed the new steps in a call with governors on Tuesday, and Biden will highlight the program during a virtual meeting with a bipartisan group of governors on Tuesday afternoon.

----------------

 

Pondering

Aristotleded24 wrote:

So there are ways for societies to handle people it considers internal threats.

I don't see what being in favor of vaccination has to to with Israel's abuse of Palestinians. I am in favor of people choosing to withdraw rather than be vaccinated. I am not in favor of vaccine "passports" but I accept countries may require proof of vaccination to enter and cruise ships as well. 

Within Canada I think we will reach sufficient uptake not to require any form of proof however some employers may require it. 

Aristotleded24

Manitoba now joins the craziness:

Quote:

All Manitobans 12 and up are now eligible to be vaccinated against COVID-19.

Manitobans 12-17 now qualify for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, the province said in a news release this morning.

"We believe this will help us protect even more people, more families, more communities from the third wave of COVID-19," said Dr. Joss Reimer, medical lead of the provincial task force, during a Friday technical briefing.

Those 12 to 15 can attend with a parent, guardian or caregiver. A parent can also sign off on a consent form ahead of time and kids can go alone, Reimer said.

To any parents reading this: adolescents in this age group are at such a low risk from covid that the risk-benefit balance for them is practically all risk and no benefit. People who want to force your children to be vaccinated in order to attend school are saying their fear is more important than your child's well-being and safety. They want everyone else around them to change to placate their fear instead of taking responsibility for their own emotional well-being.

Pages