I like the author's explanation for why he and his wife haven't gotten vaccinated: her doctor told her to wait until after she had the baby, which is understandable I guess. But why does that mean that the husband wouldn't get vaccinated? Why aren't they worried about him bringing covid home to his pregnant wife? The authors claim that he supports getting vaccinated, but only doesn't support vaccine mandates, is not congruous with his actions. He has no reason not to do it other than being a CHUD.
Of course there is pressure from the government to get vaccinated. We're talking about public health. It's not a personal decision anymore than the MMR or polio vaccines.
>It's not a personal decision anymore than the MMR or polio vaccines.
I am tired of this false equivalence. Shall we compare them?
The MMR and polio vaccines:
- are very effective
- give lifelong immunity
- target very dangerous diseases
- diseases which are particularly dangerous to children
The Corona vaccines:
- are mildly effective (they reduce symptoms certainly, but infections are still very common among the vaccinated, and so is spread)
- immunity fades rapidly
- target a disease which is not that dangerous
- and is particularly not-dangerous for children
I can see why it may be justifiable to mandate MMR and polio shots (though actually, where I live neither are mandated). The people most at risk (children) are not able to give consent, so it is arguably justifiable for the state to override parental wishes in such cases. I cannot see how it is justifiable to mandate the corona vaccines. The people who are actually at serious risk are perfectly capable of giving consent -- or not. Forcing it is a violation of bodily autonomy, pure and simple.
"Public health" cannot be a universal excuse to tell people what to do. Obesity is also a major risk factor for coronavirus; are we also going to bar fat people from participation in society, on the excuse that they are burdening the health system?
The COVID vaccines are 95%+ effective against the original COVID virus. This is better than some of the vaccines we routinely give out, and worse than some.
- lifelong immunity
One of our routine vaccinations (tetanus) needs booster shots every ten years. Some routine vaccinations need 4 doses before effectiveness. And this is for diseases that aren't mutating.
The COVID "waning immunity" story is a red herring. All vaccinations only produce antibodies for a few months -- B cells etc provide immunity after a few months for COVID and every other viral vaccine.
- target a disease which is not that dangerous
COVID has a fatality rate between 0.2 and 1.0 %. This is higher than the death rate for measles and many other diseases we routinely vaccinate for.
The original COVID virus is practically defunct. It was outcompeted by other strains. Effectiveness is sharply declining.
Ten years is much longer than ten months, which is how long the corona vaccines have been around.
Waning immunity is not a red herring. The entire mass vaccination strategy was predicated on the idea that everyone would get one or two doses and the virus would be defeated and we go back to normal. Spare me this motte/bailey sophistry.
Measles: again you conflate a disease that attacks children with a disease that does not. The 0.2-1% mortality figure for measles is almost entirely concentrated among children. Rate of child death from corona is negligible. You bring up 700 dead children from corona -- yes this is a tragedy, but it is comparable to influenza. A bad flu season will see something like 500-600 under-18s die in USA over course of a year (and is your 700 figure for a single year, or summed across both pandemic years?). I am sorry but we cannot shut down society for this.
Measles has a death rate of 1 in 1000 children. That's massively lower than COVID, which is some unknown amount higher than 2 in 1000 of the entire population.
I didn't say we shut down for 700 deaths. But that number is enough to justify minor interventions, like masking until a vaccine is available for every one, and then vaccinating broadly.
You mean the Singapore with 300 total deaths out of a population of 6 million?
85% would likely be enough to stop the original COVID variant, but Delta is much more transmissible and likely needs a 90% vaccination rate. And that 90% has to be widespread -- pockets of lower vaccination rates can incubate the disease.
And until we vaccinate children, every school is an incubator.
I highly doubt 90% is going to apply as a new goalpost.
Yes, it reduces ICU and deaths in risk groups A LOT, but it doesn't explain forcing or pressuring people out of risk groups to vaccinate.
There's more information constantly flowing in now, how under reported all the different complications and side effects vaccines can cause actually is now. And why is it under reported? Because of the whole propaganda of "vaccines are safe and effective, can't do you harm, if you believe otherwise you are anti-science moron".
People even if they have long lasting side effects they are ridiculed when they go to doctor's and same with their families. No reporting going on about this at all. I've read over 1000 anecdotal stories by now, where similar set of circumstances happen, although if you read those stories it would be obvious that these are not coincidences, imagination of people or anything remotely like that.
It's great that a recent video came out where Kyle is interviewed by Dr John Campbell about his experience with doctors.
If they were trying to hide vaccine side effects, they would have hidden the pericardia side effect. The side effect rate is close enough to the baseline pericardia rate and the consequences minor enough that it would have been easy to hide. They delayed the vaccine roll out to children a couple of months to further verify that. That really pisses me off, because rolling the kids vaccine out a couple months earlier would have a saved a good number of lives.
If you want to talk about side effects, lets talk about the side effects of COVID. I've got a friend with Chronic Fatigue as a side effect from H1N1, a really nasty disease. She's on long term disability and the economy so all of us insurance customers and taxpayers are paying for her support for 25+ years instead of her being gainfully employed. Widespread long COVID is going to cause massive suffering to people and the economy.
I'm not sure if anyone is trying to hide vaccine side effects, but here are few things I'm convinced of:
1. Post vaccine long term side effects are severely under reported. I don't know by how much, though.
2. Doctors generally don't take patients seriously who claim they have some issues from vaccines. These rarely get reported.
I also think that covid is terrible and likely has higher chance of causing long term damage, and this is why I have elected to stay home. I'm staying home until there's more awareness of both, long covid, and vaccine complications and more info about treating either of those.
I have read over probably 1,000 anecdotal stories right now, and there's similar pattern every time, despite symptoms being so similar, doctors rarely believe vaccines could be the cause.
So the research group React19, for instance which is dealing with vaccine complications since end of 2020, supposedly has 5,000 people it has been in contact with (from where supposedly 6 people had committed suicide - according to Kyle, who's also been talking with the group). They have conducted a survey, there was a following question:
Are you the only one in your family to have a persistent
adverse reaction to the vaccine?
Yes: 142
No: 13
So out of 155 respondents, 13 had another family member who had persistent adverse reaction. What is the average count of family members per people? This implies a lot more frequent persistent adverse reactions from vaccines that is generally reported so far.
At least I would like this being addressed somehow.
And similarly looking at anecdotal stories, there are often couples who have had persistent adverse effects, and there was just now a video story John Campbell showed where 2 training partners together were diagnosed with one pericarditis and the other one with myocarditis. If there's multiple people together getting this diagnosis with the frequency I'm seeing, it seems it's generally under reported.
According to the same survey top symptoms are
1) Fatigue
2) Brain fog
and heart issues only comes next.
I definitely don't want 1) and 2) either, so I'm just waiting for someone to address all of this.
Hi is there other react19 groups in other countries like in NZ. Would this group promote setting up other similar groups in other western countries like NZ
Many people believe that autoimmune and/or psycho-somatic disorders are vastly underdiagnosed in the populace, that there are millions of Americans undiagnosed with those disorders. If so, having a few thousand coincidentally appear after vaccination is likely just that, coincidence.
And those are nasty diseases. I have one friend with Guillaim Barre as a side effect of H1N1, one friend with
Myalgic Encephalomyelitis as a side effect of H1N1 and a cousin with Lupus.
So doing all you can to avoid these diseases is smart.
Which means getting COVID and flu vaccines. Even if the vaccine causes these chronic diseases, it does so at a very low rate compared to the actual disease. Millions of Americans already have long COVID. Herd immunity may eventually protect future generations of Americans and current citizens of New Zealand and Singapore, but it's not going to protect the current citizens of the US.
Shouldn't it be a person behaviour dependant decision - whether to take the vaccine?
E.g. for example, currently I calculate myself to be near people that in theory it would be possible to catch covid only around 5-6 hours per week, 3h from it outside, and 3h inside gym at times when gym is fairly empty and it's easy for me to hold a 3m+ distance from everyone. Besides that I work from home, and order everything in.
Considering everyday infection rate I can calculate from that what my chances of getting covid are based on how much I think other people on average spend around other people, or their families. This would be back of the napkin calculation, but wouldn't that be fair to assess chances of getting covid?
These may be some odd coincidences -- although personally based on my readings of those anecdotal stories I don't see how. But even if let's say they might be coincidences, how can I know for sure?
I also thought and am aware of the fact if there's a disease that is diagnosed at least e.g. 365,000 times a year and if all people would eat ice-cream once a year, then there would be 1,000 people getting that diagnosis just the next day, but I feel like the patterns are too similar for the stories I've read.
My wife (a physician) has heard tons of stories from people who were in very strict isolation for 6, 9, 12, 15 months and then did Thanksgiving or Christmas at their kids house once, got COVID and ended up in the hospital.
In comparison you're at much higher risk than they were since you're not in isolation. COVID is endemic in the US and most of the world, so your chance of eventually getting it is approximately 100%.
Once you get it, your risk of dying is between 1 and 20 in 1000 depending on your age and risk factors. Your risk of getting long COVID is approximately 1 in 10. Most long COVID isn't chronic illness, but some is, and it's awful.
In comparison, your risk of a mild heart infection from the vaccine is less than 1 in 100,000 and any other risks are less than that.
And for prevalency, still, there seems to be too many situations where people in the same family or partners together have got issues. How would there be so many occurrences if it was truly so rare?
I have seen this from many anecdotal stories, but also here's one that is available as a video post - for added legitimacy:
Besides that with most of those stories it goes hand in hand that doctors don't know what to diagnose, or they have no idea how to treat what they are seeing and it doesn't end up get reported as well -- this is what I've seen as a pattern from all the stories I've read.
By the way, I really wish I could just do the shot, since I'm tired of being afraid as well, so if someone managed to convince me that I'm worrying about nothing, it would be great.
I can't convince you you're worried about nothing. All I can do is convince you that you have to choose between a risk with low odds and a risk with high odds.
I need some resource that would convince me since this has taken a huge mental toll on me. Not to mention the fact that I'm researching this daily and my thoughts are focused around it, I also feel the pressure from government and all the people being against me. The feeling like I'm to blame for the pandemic is immense.
For example with the arguments that you made, I don't see how it's mathematically, statistically or in any way likely/possible, that heart inflammation rate is just 1 out of 100,000 or less.
The reason being I've seen reports of multiple people getting the diagnosis after the vaccine together, as one example in the video that I showed.
Back of the napkin math again:
Let's say we have 2 billions of vaccinated people.
And let's divide this into 2 groups of 1 bil, and let's say that for each person there's one other person in the other group that they are most connected or tied to, e.g. it could be said that they are partners or a couple. Because the way I've tried to understand how serious the issue could be is whether in those anecdotes I see both people having issues.
If the likelihood is 1 out of 100,000, then we would expect from group A
to end up with 1B/100K, I would expect to see 10,000 affected people over the world.
Now, for each of those 10,000 they have a partner from the group B. The chances for each of their partners to have this same issue should be 1/100,000.
So this comes to roughly there being only a chance of 10% (around 9.5% to be a bit more precise) for there to be any partners with long term issue. So we have this anecdotal video from YouTube. Is whoever sent the video doing a hoax? And the other anecdotal stories with couples/partners both having long term issues, are all of those hoaxes?
I'm in one of the age groups and genders having the highest chances of heart inflammation issues and one at the same time one of the lowest to have issues with covid.
I agree that long covid is a real danger, but just recently some study came out that vaccines may not reduce chances of long covid, just hospitalisations/deaths.
I mean there's too much data that doesn't make sense, the anecdotal stories I'm seeing don't make sense based on usual claims for all the rates and Pfizer studies and everything that I'm seeing.
How can I do anything, if none of this seems to make sense? I feel like I'm slowly going crazy.
I'm also not against corona vaccines, but I'm definitely against making them mandatory or having mandatory pressure on this. If it had been 10+ years on market and known to be safe, I would maybe consider it, but there's data and reports coming in of risks that were never mentioned in the early 2021. What other risks aren't we aware of yet, if it took us so long time to find out about those.
And, I would be fine with using a cheap testing kit each morning before going out.
But I want to be able to choose to have enough data to feel comfortable about taking this vaccine. Is that too much to ask?
They don't reliably stop you from contracting it, they don't reliably stop you from spreading it, they don't reliably stop symptoms. They are "mildly effective" by any reasonable comparison to any decent pre-existing vaccine (no, the flu vaccine doesn't count). And they are getting less effective by the day. Already we are hearing talk of third, fourth, fifth booster shots -- for a vaccine that is less than a year old. Have you ever heard of such a thing before, for any other shot?
As for 700k deaths -- yes, 700k mostly old, mostly already unhealthy deaths in a country of 320 million people, tallied across two years. This is not a civilization-ending plague. Moreover, almost all of the at-risk demographic already has been vaccinated. So if they are as effective as you imply, what is the justification for forcing it on everyone else? You cannot simultaneously claim that they are so effective, and at the same time that everyone must be vaccinated in order to protect the at-risk people who are themselves already vaccinated. It is a deranged contradiction.
That immunocompromised portion of the population are not going to be protected either way. Did you not read what I said? The vaccine does not prevent transmission! Herd immunity will not happen with such a leaky vaccine.
The vaccine doesn't have to prevent transmission for herd immunity to occur. It just has to push the R-value for spread under 1. And it does that very effectively. It's not particular effective at preventing breakthrough infections from spreading the disease, but it is quite effective at preventing infection in the first place.
> It's not a personal decision anymore than the MMR or polio vaccines.
The world will be made by the people browsing HN. Programmers will be the new blue collar workers whose decisions will impact our infrastructure more than almost anybody.
Holding views like this is a scary proposition for the new world we're entering. I am deeply disturbed by how pronounced the desire for authoritarianism is among this group of individuals.
We are supposed to be better than this. Free software is all about freedom - not conformity. It is about having the freedom to maintain one's privacy and not having to explain yourself for wanting to maintain that position. The code is the code, but motivations for that code are wholly irrelevant.
Instead we appear to be drifting in the direction of "open source" - full of wining babies who demand things from the select few with the actual talent with complete disregard for other people's rights, motivations, talents, and interests.
It's a miracle that installing McAfee Antivirus software on our computers was never a government-mandated law.
Please do not take HN threads further into flamewar hell. A reply like this is arguably worse than the original post, since the flames would die out on their own if not fed. That's why we have this in the guidelines: "Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead." a.k.a. please don't feed the trolls
If HN users follow that rule and do both (i.e. both not reply and also flag), not only will the flames not be fed, they'll be put out. That's the culture we want here.
In Australia the rationale for a Vaccine Passport is because the unvaccinated are super spreaders.
Yet, the latest data out of the UK (COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report Week 42, Page 13) [1] shows that the double-vaccinated are around TWICE as likely to catch COVID-19 (and according to the CDC, the viral load of a vaccinated person is the same as an unvaccinated person due to the vaccines being systemic and not mucosal vaccines).
This leaves two possible reasons for vaccine passports;
1) To punish the unvaccinated for not taking the vaccine.
2) To reduce the burden on the health system. But in a country nearing 90% double vaccinated, this point holds less weight.
"In Australia the rationale for a Vaccine Passport is because the unvaccinated are super spreaders."
That's definitely not the primary, or only reason. In many states, hospitals are severely underfunded and aren't ready for the influx of patients. Stop trying to make it sound like a vaccine passport has no rationale, not to mention, trivialize the amount of freedom Australians have had during the pandemic, compared to other counties.
Point 2 is the stated aim. Will there be big difference between say 85% and 90%? Probably not, but it's a politically popular move so they'll keep pushing forwards with it.
I am not sure about the insignificance of 5%. In Germany, hospitals loose personnell, because after 3 big waves people simply can't cope with the stress any more. Every health system in countries which play fast and loose this winter will have a really bad time.
Yet, the latest data out of the UK (COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report Week 42, Page 13) [1] shows that the
double-vaccinated are around TWICE as likely to catch COVID-19
I hope you don't work in programming or data analytics
If the answer is "of course there are more cases in the vaccinated, because more people are vaccinated", then see the table at the top of page 13, specifically the last 2 columns showing cases per 100,000 population. For age range 30-39 and above, the rates per population in the vaccinated are higher than the unvaccinated.
Cause, if you write "twice as likely" you will have to measure against vaccincation rates. If 1000 people are vaccinated, and 10 get infected, versus 10 unvaccinated with 1 infection: who is more likely?
In the hypothetical you gave, the unvaccinated is more likely (1/10 versus 1/100).
Compare that to the data from the UK vaccine surveillance report, and you'll see the opposite is true in reality (for age ranges 30-39 and above).
For example, for age range 30-39, between week 38 and 41 2021, there were 956.7 cases reported per 100,000 among the vaccinated, and 751.1 per 100,000 among the unvaccinated.
I would like to argue that point by saying these 100,000 are not separated in 100,000 vaccinated and 100,000 unvaccinated, but I am not sure.
Anyway: in Germany the numbers are: 4 times more probable for the unvaccinated. I all depends on how people protect themselves, and that is the reason for vaccination passes: less infections, much less symptoms, much much less hospitalisations, almost no deaths in otherwise healthy people under 80 = no lockdowns.
"The rate of a positive COVID-19 test varies by age and vaccination status. The rate of a positive COVID-19 test is substantially lower in vaccinated individuals compared to unvaccinated individuals up to the age of 29. In individuals aged greater than 30, the rate of a positive COVID-19 test is higher in vaccinated individuals compared to unvaccinated. This is likely to be due to a variety of reasons, including differences in the population of vaccinated and unvaccinated people as well as differences in testing patterns."
> I would like to argue that point by saying these 100,000 are not separated in 100,000 vaccinated and 100,000 unvaccinated, but I am not sure.
That is exactly how they are separated. What else would "Rates among persons vaccinated
with 2 doses (per 100,000)" and "Rates among persons not vaccinated (per 100,000)" mean?
Evidently the vaccines in Germany are working more effectively. That's good news!
Trigger Warning: plenty of COVID 'misinformation' in this post!
I'm never taking the so-called 'vaccine'. I believe there is a sound empirical basis to question pretty much all aspects of the conventional narrative.
I think I can hold out for a while yet, but I'm resigned to the fact that at a certain point the current deprivation of rights/isolation/demonisation stage may give way to outright genocide of the unvaccinated. The writer describes how the government of Lithuania are moving towards coercion with the threat of denial of food and shelter via denial of income; that's already not far off a death sentence in a Baltic winter. Going back to the facts I'm not yet convinced this is a particularly lethal disease. Does it really justify exterminating people that refuse to give up their bodily autonomy? I saw a sticker that was along the lines of 'a vaccine that doesn't work, for a disease that's so lethal you have to be tested to know whether you've had it'. I've yet to be convinced this isn't valid.
If/when (more than likely when rather than if here in the UK, depressingly) this happens here I will have to flee. To be honest, with many of the vaccinated apparently having been turned, Rwanda style, into take-no-prisoners zealots, I wish there were a free country that people like me could move to and be isolated from the ROW, with the agreement that we stay in this country and never travel to the COVID-tyranny zone. If the vaccinated do not want me in their society, well, I have a message for you: at this point the feeling is kind of mutual. I suspect the land of the unvaccinated and free would do rather well.
I've been keeping tabs on other countries to see those where the flame of freedom has not yet been extinguished, but it's pretty difficult to ascertain given that I'm living in one the main pushers of the COVID (WEF/Great Reset?) agenda. Does anyone know of a single website that aggregates this data?
“ In this article, I'll describe the details of how the Covid Pass works in my country and how it affects my family.”
the author should tell us he how being unvaccinated affects those in need of hospitalisation but cant access it since ICU are swamped by those who could have avoided hospitalisation is vaxxed.
the selfishness is utterly appalling and i fail to understand why the eu keeps financing these states. have a large mass of unvaccinated people? deal with the next waves yourselves and dont send your covidiots to work in our countries. simple as that.
Most of the nations where these kinds of restrictions are in place aren't in danger of getting their hospitals swamped to that degree.
It might be correlated (they might not be in danger of this because they have said restrictions), but that makes it very hard to convince people.
I personally do think that restrictions at this point are kinda pointless (at least in Europe). We've had enough time to get vaccinated and unless we're planning to live with these restrictions forever now, there is little point on keeping them active.
Postponing it more makes it worse on my opinion, because the vaccines lose potency with time.
> Most of the nations where these kinds of restrictions are in place aren't in danger of getting their hospitals swamped to that degree.
Yes, but i'll tell you, the physicians are fed up (or at least the emergency physician i know is). Working in a hospital during the crisis was not pro-bono, but close. His 70-hour weeks for 6 week and his "vacations" (known as week-end for the rest of us) for the remaining of 2020 did burn him a bit. At least he got some "thank you".
Did you ever had a client (or a boss) that wanted you to implement something that you knew would create issues, and ignored your advices. You helped him anyway, mitigated the loss because you worked harder than your were paid to, even taking time of your week-end to help. He said thank you, but did not offer a significant pay raise. Then, 4 month later, the EXACT same thing happen. Do you focus on other client? Do you quit to find a new job?
I wouldn't be mad if my cousin refused to take care of Covid patients, especially unvaccinated ones. I know he morally, physically, can't but tbh i would've quit last year if i where him. I guess that's why i'm not in the field.
The president of the AMA in Victoria (australia) 2 days ago came out saying that non vaccinated people should sign advanced care directives to opt out of resus care given their choices. It has been panned by the national AMA and the past president as well as a very strong majority of doctors here (we did, after all, take a vow and the idea that you withhold care from people is really quite unthinkable) but absolutely many in the medical profession are really tired of what’s going on when there is an easily available and unfortunately politicised option that will reduce your risk of needing hospital care by 70-90%
Literally all developed countries have had some of their hospitals swamped at some point during most flu seasons and yet we don't act like the world is ending every year.
Is that really true? In the U.S., I know Seattle was briefly swamped and NYC was briefly swamped. But you are talking about a few cities being swamped for a few weeks. Not the entire nation's hospitals being swamped for a few months.
I remember reading that Arizona hospitals were "overwhelmed" but the only actual data I saw on that was a peak of 90% ICU capacity. There was a story about the maricopa county morgue being too full, but that turned out to be mostly bureaucratic incompetence.
The problem might be inefficient load balancing on hospitals, so even if, say, 80% of ICU beds are taken, you will get some hospitals that run out of beds while others have lots of excess capacity and an inability to efficiently share the load.
It would be interesting to get systematic data on this, together with some ideas on how to improve load balancing.
I seem to remember various huge warehouses and hotels being requisitioned by local governments and medical authorities for a projected mass surge in corona patients, which never materialized. These emergency triage centres sat empty and unused. It was somewhat embarrassing.
Yes, some places had temporary surges for which they were unable to cope, early in the pandemic. Wuhan, parts of Italy, New York, a few others. But it never happened in a systematic way. If hospitals truly believed that overcrowding were a looming threat, they would not be laying off nurses as they are in many American localities.
Replace unvaccinated with fat people or smokers who are a far greater burden on the health system, yet you don't see this moral grandstanding about them.
But the health system is engineered to cope with the base load, and there are also many public health measures designed to try and move their behaviour to more healthy ones as well. Just because the magnitude of the covid/infectious disease response we are seeing now is so strong is only because the burden of disease is so high. There are always anti smoking and exercise/healthy eating measures, but they pale into the background given the lack of acuity… much to public health officials dismay
I dint know many people catching the fat or the smoke. But yes good point - smokers are segregated and not allowed to smoke inside, so whats your point?
Demanding the right to basic participation in society is not "selfishness". This Corona pass regime is utterly insidious and evil, and nobody should submit to this moral blackmail about overloaded hospitals. The effect of vaccination on hospital admission is ... equivocal, at best. Check out the numbers for Scotland, for example:
I presume you would apply the same logic to those in your own nation that smoke cigarettes, who don't get enough physical exercise, and who eat poorly - yes?
Those all appear to be far more likely indicators of hospitalization than your vaccination status, after all. Furthermore, when these overweight smokers with poor diet seek other care for their primary illnesses, I would imagine they get thrown onto the streets and told to get to the back of the line so that the more deserving people can get care first?
I am fully vaxed and plan on getting a booster shot next week. But I see where the anti-mandate crowd is coming from. It's about giving up freedoms that will never come back. In the course of a country's history the trend is more and more laws, which in my opinion cement the ruling class's power. I bet the trend is less upward mobility for the age of a county. What happens throughout history is that these laws keep people in power who are not beneficial to society and there is eventually a revolution where the laws are upended and a new county is formed with a blank slate of laws. Bringing it back to vax passports, I think it is another brick in the wall of laws keeping the current ruling class in power.
Lithuanian constitution specifically states that no one can be forced to use experimental drugs, yet now you can't go to the shop and buy food if you are unvaccinated. Just yesterday hundreds of cops were checking people in stores for papers.
If this is not a dystopian autocracy then I don't know what is. I am seriously consider moving away while I still can.
In Ireland 92% of adults are vaccinated and 75% of the population overall. The "low" vaccination rate among children has more to do with the delays in approving the vaccines than any kind of resistance. I have been told this is among the best vaccination rates in Europe.
Despite this the government has just pushed back the return to normality yet again. They drafted a "vaccinate our way out" plan that would almost certainly fail because it allegedly requires some fraction of the populace in excess of 92% to comply. When it failed, they accused that fraction of spoiling their plans. And then, rather than accepting their failure and moving on, they began punishing the entire populace for it for an indeterminate amount of time.
Perhaps in other countries with higher rates of vaccine hesitancy the story is different. But in my mind, the responsibility here lies with those who made getting our lives back contingent on an outcome that was never realistically going to occur.
In much of red America folks are already living freely like before. Most of the major impacts like job walk-outs and shortages are directly resulting from more heavy-handed covid measures imposed in other states or by the federal government.
Does this also extend to the willfully obese? Smokers? Chronic drug abusers, alcoholics, etc? It is my impression these are compounding factors listed as comorbidities to Covid, however we don't seem to focus on these segments of the population much, perhaps because of our own personal biases as most humans in this age fall into one or more of those categories.
What do comorbidity have to do with this? It's a total strawman in the context of the situation, considering that those people can also get vaccinated and hopefully not waste their time and our doctor's time by occupying a hospital bed.
Comorbidity has quite a lot do with cause of hospitalization. One study [1] observed that 94.9% of people hospitalized for severe COVID-19 had at least one underlying medical condition.
No worries, we will not vaccinate you against your will. There will be no mandate. A negative rapid antigen test result is deemed equivalent to a proof of vaccination.
* Of course, the test must be carried out by a service provider pursuant to section 123 (4) of the "Ordinance on SARS-CoV-2 Testing". Due to a decreasing need in testing, there will be of course less and less service providers in your area.
* Of course, the test result must pertain to a test taken no earlier than 24 hours. Please arrange enough time (the result is usually available within 15 to 60 minutes) before or after work to obtain your test result (business hours: 8am - 5:30pm).
* Of course, since free vaccinations are now available to all, it is no longer acceptable for taxpayers to bear the costs of the tests on a permanent basis. An antigen test costs about 15 to 30 dollars on average. A decreasing need in testing might of course lead to higher costs in the future.
No one will come for you. They will simply cut you off - won't provide healthcare, won't allow you into the stores to buy food, force your employer to fire you so you have no income. But it's not force - you can choose. Same way like people actually have all the freedoms in North Korea - they can be critical of supreme leader if they want to they just need to choose to do it.
This article is written by a troll. Account with the same name has been active on lithuanian twitter recently and been spreading fake information about life in lithuania under covid pass.
Vaccinated people fearing unvaccinated people makes zero sense.
If the vaccines were 100% effective, then there is no reason for the fear.
If they were 0% effective then there is no reason for the fear.
There is no sane way to interpolate between those two values other than in a straight line.
The amount unvaccinated people transmit the disease more than vaccinated people is EXACTLY the incremental amount that the vaccine increases protection.
I'm vaccinated. I think this article is written by a troll. And I think >90% of voluntarily unvaccinated people have severe problems evaluating risks, likely including the author of this post.
That being said, there are legitimate reasons that a small number of people cannot or should not get vaccinated. We should be very careful not to treat these people as second class citizens in our zeal to protect ourselves.
I got a taste of this in the spring. I am living in a country where I am not a citizen, and was last in line to qualify for a vaccine. Without a vaccine certificate, I was unable to enter restaurants, bars and some other businesses. For me, I think it was a reasonable short term restriction, but it sure felt extremely unfair to not be able to enter places, and not have any power to change that.
We ought to be doing everything we can to vaccinate as many people as possible right now, during a crisis period. I'm in support of temporary vaccine mandates and immunity passports. But they need to have a time limit that's measured in months, not years. I'm hopeful that all these mandates and intrusive bureaucracy is completely over by mid-2022.
Exactly. The system is working as intended. Though, things are not miserable and costly enough yet apparently because he's not getting his jab just yet.
People are still getting sick, even after getting vaccinated. So, I don't want this person anywhere near people I care about. Or near me. Or any people for that matter. We probably all know people that had the virus or that died because of it. So, I'm glad many countries are putting policies in place that are designed to de-risk public life a bit. We need more of that and less people like this running around unvaccinated.
It doesn't. Vaccines do protect people. Mortality is a lot lower if they get it and their chances of getting it are lower. But no vaccine is perfect. And these were developed in a hurry of course.
What's your argument here? Just get the damn jab if you haven't already.
Of course there is pressure from the government to get vaccinated. We're talking about public health. It's not a personal decision anymore than the MMR or polio vaccines.