FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Vaccine Passports
Vaccine Passports
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are attending a large event in October and the event has stated nothing about a vaccine passport in its terms or conditions." I appreciate that however this news literally broke today. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9959563/Ministers-confirm-vaccine-passports-required-large-venues.html | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are attending a large event in October and the event has stated nothing about a vaccine passport in its terms or conditions." See or post on the other "virus rethink" thread. We had to show jab cards at a "sold out" gig last night-yet there were empty seats everywhere so I assumed tickets bought by non jabbed patrons when they first went on sale went unused due to the venues policy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are attending a large event in October and the event has stated nothing about a vaccine passport in its terms or conditions. See or post on the other "virus rethink" thread. We had to show jab cards at a "sold out" gig last night-yet there were empty seats everywhere so I assumed tickets bought by non jabbed patrons when they first went on sale went unused due to the venues policy." We have just checked again and nothing stating proof of vaccination. We will keep checking for any changes. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are attending a large event in October and the event has stated nothing about a vaccine passport in its terms or conditions. See or post on the other "virus rethink" thread. We had to show jab cards at a "sold out" gig last night-yet there were empty seats everywhere so I assumed tickets bought by non jabbed patrons when they first went on sale went unused due to the venues policy." That is so deceptive and sneaky off the venue to do it! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait "What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are attending a large event in October and the event has stated nothing about a vaccine passport in its terms or conditions. I appreciate that however this news literally broke today. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9959563/Ministers-confirm-vaccine-passports-required-large-venues.html" It's the daily fail. The headline states October, but there is nothing in the article giving a time line for implementation. Can only see what happens. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Despite ruling them out earlier this year, Nadhim Zahawi confirmed this morning that Covid passport's will the required to enter large venues from October. Given that we now KNOW that the Vaccines don't prevent transmission, what's the SCIENTIFIC basis for this? One a side note, recent data demonstrates that vaccinated people are more likely to catch the disease and transmit the same viral load as unvaccinated people once they do catch it. Have a look at the links below. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9959563/Ministers-confirm-vaccine-passports-required-large-venues.html https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 Vaccine does not prevent transmission if people are infected but it does reduce the chance of getting infected and reduces the symptoms (FACT). If we want to be as safe as possible then vaccine passports are essential at present and those refusing are placing others at risk. Question should be why do people not want to prove their vaccine status... Why do people quote human rights whilst refusing to accept accountability for their own actions? Would people be happy to charged under civil or criminal law for infecting others by their refusal to get vaccinated. Sooner vaccine evidence is demanded the better... I will trust venues more if I know all around me are vaccinated... If people dont want to get vaccinated then they bar themselves from such events... Vaccine passorts also reduce the potential of infecting the staff working at such venues. Vaccine passports are being used also to persaude the younger groups to get vaccinated in order to protect the community and their own families and friends... Why cannot they be responsibile and accountable for their actions too like they hold everyone else to such a standard... Where I work. Staff are tested twice weekly and if positive are isolated (rarely happens). Our customers are also PCR tested and required to isolate before coming in. Strangely no one refuses the test... Those that refuse to isolate are denied access if we find out. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x I'm well aware that the plans were announced months ago. You've completely avoided the question though!!! I'll ask you again. Given what we now know about transmission, what's the SCIENTIFIC basis for Vaccine passports? Please don't dodge the questions again lol For a county that was so opposed to the nazi regime we sure are copying it, blacks at the back of the bus please, oh wait sorry not the blacks we realised that segregation was bullshit 50+ years ago, none vaccinated to the back please" Whilst I see your point... They could get vaccinated then they have access. Why is it a big deal... I work in healthcare and you dont ever want to see a patient die due to being unable to breathe. It is not a pleasant way to go... People find it asy to blame the State yet fail to be accountable for their own actions too... Why the difference in standards! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x I'm well aware that the plans were announced months ago. You've completely avoided the question though!!! I'll ask you again. Given what we now know about transmission, what's the SCIENTIFIC basis for Vaccine passports? Please don't dodge the questions again lol Oh it’s pretty simple...those vaccinated who are unlucky enough to become infected have shown over an extended study period to carry less of a viral load due to their resistance. In simple medical terms that equates to: 1) a much reduced chance of infecting others 2) more importantly a very small chance of developing serious symptoms or indeed long covid both of which would create a need for intervention from the NHS services. In short: the vaccinated are a far safer option to achieve an outcome where strain is placed on the health service yet allows an industry that has been under enormous strain to re-open. Think of it as a lady in a club saying safe sex only... is there a chance a guys condom may split? Of course there is... but is it the same risk as barebacking every male? No You guys are the bare backers... you’re free to exercise that decision but there’s no need to get arsey because the vast majority who want to remain as safe as possible have said you can’t play. It’s your choice, your consequences... end of story " Well said.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Despite ruling them out earlier this year, Nadhim Zahawi confirmed this morning that Covid passport's will the required to enter large venues from October. Given that we now KNOW that the Vaccines don't prevent transmission, what's the SCIENTIFIC basis for this? One a side note, recent data demonstrates that vaccinated people are more likely to catch the disease and transmit the same viral load as unvaccinated people once they do catch it. Have a look at the links below. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9959563/Ministers-confirm-vaccine-passports-required-large-venues.html https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 Vaccine does not prevent transmission if people are infected but it does reduce the chance of getting infected and reduces the symptoms (FACT). If we want to be as safe as possible then vaccine passports are essential at present and those refusing are placing others at risk. Question should be why do people not want to prove their vaccine status... Why do people quote human rights whilst refusing to accept accountability for their own actions? Would people be happy to charged under civil or criminal law for infecting others by their refusal to get vaccinated. Sooner vaccine evidence is demanded the better... I will trust venues more if I know all around me are vaccinated... If people dont want to get vaccinated then they bar themselves from such events... Vaccine passorts also reduce the potential of infecting the staff working at such venues. Vaccine passports are being used also to persaude the younger groups to get vaccinated in order to protect the community and their own families and friends... Why cannot they be responsibile and accountable for their actions too like they hold everyone else to such a standard... Where I work. Staff are tested twice weekly and if positive are isolated (rarely happens). Our customers are also PCR tested and required to isolate before coming in. Strangely no one refuses the test... Those that refuse to isolate are denied access if we find out. " How do vaccine passports "reduce the risk of infecting staff?" Have a look at the studies below and then please provide some evidence of your own. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For a county that was so opposed to the nazi regime we sure are copying it, blacks at the back of the bus please, oh wait sorry not the blacks we realised that segregation was bullshit 50+ years ago, none vaccinated to the back please" Lol, Jesus... A) Get a fkn grip B) re-take your GCSE history What’s next, I don’t want to take my driving test but I do want my right to drive a car!!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x I'm well aware that the plans were announced months ago. You've completely avoided the question though!!! I'll ask you again. Given what we now know about transmission, what's the SCIENTIFIC basis for Vaccine passports? Please don't dodge the questions again lol Oh it’s pretty simple...those vaccinated who are unlucky enough to become infected have shown over an extended study period to carry less of a viral load due to their resistance. In simple medical terms that equates to: 1) a much reduced chance of infecting others 2) more importantly a very small chance of developing serious symptoms or indeed long covid both of which would create a need for intervention from the NHS services. In short: the vaccinated are a far safer option to achieve an outcome where strain is placed on the health service yet allows an industry that has been under enormous strain to re-open. Think of it as a lady in a club saying safe sex only... is there a chance a guys condom may split? Of course there is... but is it the same risk as barebacking every male? No You guys are the bare backers... you’re free to exercise that decision but there’s no need to get arsey because the vast majority who want to remain as safe as possible have said you can’t play. It’s your choice, your consequences... end of story "  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For a county that was so opposed to the nazi regime we sure are copying it, blacks at the back of the bus please, oh wait sorry not the blacks we realised that segregation was bullshit 50+ years ago, none vaccinated to the back please Lol, Jesus... A) Get a fkn grip B) re-take your GCSE history What’s next, I don’t want to take my driving test but I do want my right to drive a car!!! " You're still dodging my question lol. They're still there for everyone to see. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x I'm well aware that the plans were announced months ago. You've completely avoided the question though!!! I'll ask you again. Given what we now know about transmission, what's the SCIENTIFIC basis for Vaccine passports? Please don't dodge the questions again lol Oh it’s pretty simple...those vaccinated who are unlucky enough to become infected have shown over an extended study period to carry less of a viral load due to their resistance. In simple medical terms that equates to: 1) a much reduced chance of infecting others 2) more importantly a very small chance of developing serious symptoms or indeed long covid both of which would create a need for intervention from the NHS services. In short: the vaccinated are a far safer option to achieve an outcome where strain is placed on the health service yet allows an industry that has been under enormous strain to re-open. Think of it as a lady in a club saying safe sex only... is there a chance a guys condom may split? Of course there is... but is it the same risk as barebacking every male? No You guys are the bare backers... you’re free to exercise that decision but there’s no need to get arsey because the vast majority who want to remain as safe as possible have said you can’t play. It’s your choice, your consequences... end of story "I'll leave my SCIENTIFIC evidence to refute your claims. Where's yours? My data comes from August this year by the way. I look forward to seeing yours. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x I'm well aware that the plans were announced months ago. You've completely avoided the question though!!! I'll ask you again. Given what we now know about transmission, what's the SCIENTIFIC basis for Vaccine passports? Please don't dodge the questions again lol Oh it’s pretty simple...those vaccinated who are unlucky enough to become infected have shown over an extended study period to carry less of a viral load due to their resistance. In simple medical terms that equates to: 1) a much reduced chance of infecting others 2) more importantly a very small chance of developing serious symptoms or indeed long covid both of which would create a need for intervention from the NHS services. In short: the vaccinated are a far safer option to achieve an outcome where strain is placed on the health service yet allows an industry that has been under enormous strain to re-open. Think of it as a lady in a club saying safe sex only... is there a chance a guys condom may split? Of course there is... but is it the same risk as barebacking every male? No You guys are the bare backers... you’re free to exercise that decision but there’s no need to get arsey because the vast majority who want to remain as safe as possible have said you can’t play. It’s your choice, your consequences... end of story
I'll leave my SCIENTIFIC evidence to refute your claims. Where's yours? My data comes from August this year by the way. I look forward to seeing yours.
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1" The other poster is trying to convince themselves....basically shitting their pants as to what the vax is now doing to their system | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x" Yes a real load of crap posted here... but that is because people read newspapers rather than scientific journals and actually understand the problem. Headlines say one thing and are written with an agenda viewpoint... Science is science, 1 plus 1 = 2 still. No agenda. Believe the real evidence or the disinformation campaign who say you dont get the question if you oppose them yet they fail to show any real evidence to avoid the gold standard... If hospital avoided the gold standard in testing for cancer then I am sure everyone would be complaining so why the difference in standards... simple, humans are selfish... If the unvaccinated dont want the vaccine then get covid and get some cover but then dont complain when cancer services are reduced as a result of the increased healthcare demand either.... As a person who works in healthcare I will point out that the covid virus has been discriminatory in nature... it seems to be seeking out the unvaccinated and putting those at higher risk in hospital... Darwinian theory coming to reality. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x I'm well aware that the plans were announced months ago. You've completely avoided the question though!!! I'll ask you again. Given what we now know about transmission, what's the SCIENTIFIC basis for Vaccine passports? Please don't dodge the questions again lol Oh it’s pretty simple...those vaccinated who are unlucky enough to become infected have shown over an extended study period to carry less of a viral load due to their resistance. In simple medical terms that equates to: 1) a much reduced chance of infecting others 2) more importantly a very small chance of developing serious symptoms or indeed long covid both of which would create a need for intervention from the NHS services. In short: the vaccinated are a far safer option to achieve an outcome where strain is placed on the health service yet allows an industry that has been under enormous strain to re-open. Think of it as a lady in a club saying safe sex only... is there a chance a guys condom may split? Of course there is... but is it the same risk as barebacking every male? No You guys are the bare backers... you’re free to exercise that decision but there’s no need to get arsey because the vast majority who want to remain as safe as possible have said you can’t play. It’s your choice, your consequences... end of story
I'll leave my SCIENTIFIC evidence to refute your claims. Where's yours? My data comes from August this year by the way. I look forward to seeing yours.
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1"Mine comes from working solidly in an NHS icu for the past 16 months in what is the UK’s hardest hit covid city. The articles you reference are a completely separate medical question... how do we prolong the effectiveness of a vaccinations cover over time. There’s zero argument within the scientific community about the positive impact vaccination has, it’s clearly demonstrated over our own figures for the past 9 months. The fact you’re not in lockdown still stands testimony to that. The Israel scenario is just a highlight to what we already knew, as with the flu vaccines we are likely to require an updated booster each year... that’s not a big issue for most to be blunt. So, here’s a question for you not to dodge... what is the single factor that has kept hospital admissions at a pandemic low over the last 6 months despite infection rates rising and newer, far more aggressive covid variations being rife within the community? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x Yes a real load of crap posted here... but that is because people read newspapers rather than scientific journals and actually understand the problem. Headlines say one thing and are written with an agenda viewpoint... Science is science, 1 plus 1 = 2 still. No agenda. Believe the real evidence or the disinformation campaign who say you dont get the question if you oppose them yet they fail to show any real evidence to avoid the gold standard... If hospital avoided the gold standard in testing for cancer then I am sure everyone would be complaining so why the difference in standards... simple, humans are selfish... If the unvaccinated dont want the vaccine then get covid and get some cover but then dont complain when cancer services are reduced as a result of the increased healthcare demand either.... As a person who works in healthcare I will point out that the covid virus has been discriminatory in nature... it seems to be seeking out the unvaccinated and putting those at higher risk in hospital... Darwinian theory coming to reality." So please explain why Israel one of the most jabbed countries on earth are now the worlds covid hotspot with majority of Admissions to Hospital the Fully Vaxxed. Very very low covid next door in Egypt that use Ivermectin. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The other poster is trying to convince themselves....basically shitting their pants as to what the vax is now doing to their system"Oh yeah after seeing 300+ people die lol n my shifts over the last 16 months from covid Im definitely bricking myself over being vaccinated... Strangely it’s the inverse, I am hoping as an NHS front liner who works in the red zone that we are fast tracked on whatever booster scheme is implemented in the U.K. God bless Moderna! X | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x Yes a real load of crap posted here... but that is because people read newspapers rather than scientific journals and actually understand the problem. Headlines say one thing and are written with an agenda viewpoint... Science is science, 1 plus 1 = 2 still. No agenda. Believe the real evidence or the disinformation campaign who say you dont get the question if you oppose them yet they fail to show any real evidence to avoid the gold standard... If hospital avoided the gold standard in testing for cancer then I am sure everyone would be complaining so why the difference in standards... simple, humans are selfish... If the unvaccinated dont want the vaccine then get covid and get some cover but then dont complain when cancer services are reduced as a result of the increased healthcare demand either.... As a person who works in healthcare I will point out that the covid virus has been discriminatory in nature... it seems to be seeking out the unvaccinated and putting those at higher risk in hospital... Darwinian theory coming to reality." Why don't you enlighten us all with some of your scientific evidence. I'll leave mines below for you again the interest of fairness lol. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x I'm well aware that the plans were announced months ago. You've completely avoided the question though!!! I'll ask you again. Given what we now know about transmission, what's the SCIENTIFIC basis for Vaccine passports? Please don't dodge the questions again lol Oh it’s pretty simple...those vaccinated who are unlucky enough to become infected have shown over an extended study period to carry less of a viral load due to their resistance. In simple medical terms that equates to: 1) a much reduced chance of infecting others 2) more importantly a very small chance of developing serious symptoms or indeed long covid both of which would create a need for intervention from the NHS services. In short: the vaccinated are a far safer option to achieve an outcome where strain is placed on the health service yet allows an industry that has been under enormous strain to re-open. Think of it as a lady in a club saying safe sex only... is there a chance a guys condom may split? Of course there is... but is it the same risk as barebacking every male? No You guys are the bare backers... you’re free to exercise that decision but there’s no need to get arsey because the vast majority who want to remain as safe as possible have said you can’t play. It’s your choice, your consequences... end of story
I'll leave my SCIENTIFIC evidence to refute your claims. Where's yours? My data comes from August this year by the way. I look forward to seeing yours.
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1
The other poster is trying to convince themselves....basically shitting their pants as to what the vax is now doing to their system"The vaccine has done nothing to my system... No evidence of any issues... None of my colleagues have reported any issues either... Surely if there were issues in a large organisation we should see at least one person with an issue... None of my colleagues support not having the vaccine... They are all professional healthcare workers and highly qualified and actually see the scientiic data. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wait for it to come in officially and see what it actually means. As an example to attend football at Spurs you have to be prepared to show vaccine or negative proof, spot checks only. This is based on requirements from FA and government based on covid passes being required in the future. It then links to the nhs covid pass page, which states:- ‘NHS COVID Pass An NHS COVID Pass shows your coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination details or test results. This is your COVID-19 status. You may be asked to show your pass to travel abroad, or at events and venues in England asking for proof of your COVID-19 status. Always check the entry requirements for the country or the venue you're visiting’ This is how it is now, so until the official comes in it is not known if the COVID pass will continue in the same way or be vaccine only. " What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for Vaccine passorts? I'm not interested in how they'll work logistically at the moment. I just want to know why they're necessary | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x I'm well aware that the plans were announced months ago. You've completely avoided the question though!!! I'll ask you again. Given what we now know about transmission, what's the SCIENTIFIC basis for Vaccine passports? Please don't dodge the questions again lol Oh it’s pretty simple...those vaccinated who are unlucky enough to become infected have shown over an extended study period to carry less of a viral load due to their resistance. In simple medical terms that equates to: 1) a much reduced chance of infecting others 2) more importantly a very small chance of developing serious symptoms or indeed long covid both of which would create a need for intervention from the NHS services. In short: the vaccinated are a far safer option to achieve an outcome where strain is placed on the health service yet allows an industry that has been under enormous strain to re-open. Think of it as a lady in a club saying safe sex only... is there a chance a guys condom may split? Of course there is... but is it the same risk as barebacking every male? No You guys are the bare backers... you’re free to exercise that decision but there’s no need to get arsey because the vast majority who want to remain as safe as possible have said you can’t play. It’s your choice, your consequences... end of story
I'll leave my SCIENTIFIC evidence to refute your claims. Where's yours? My data comes from August this year by the way. I look forward to seeing yours.
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1
The other poster is trying to convince themselves....basically shitting their pants as to what the vax is now doing to their system
The vaccine has done nothing to my system... No evidence of any issues... None of my colleagues have reported any issues either... Surely if there were issues in a large organisation we should see at least one person with an issue... None of my colleagues support not having the vaccine... They are all professional healthcare workers and highly qualified and actually see the scientiic data. "Yep........we believe you ........NOT | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x Yes a real load of crap posted here... but that is because people read newspapers rather than scientific journals and actually understand the problem. Headlines say one thing and are written with an agenda viewpoint... Science is science, 1 plus 1 = 2 still. No agenda. Believe the real evidence or the disinformation campaign who say you dont get the question if you oppose them yet they fail to show any real evidence to avoid the gold standard... If hospital avoided the gold standard in testing for cancer then I am sure everyone would be complaining so why the difference in standards... simple, humans are selfish... If the unvaccinated dont want the vaccine then get covid and get some cover but then dont complain when cancer services are reduced as a result of the increased healthcare demand either.... As a person who works in healthcare I will point out that the covid virus has been discriminatory in nature... it seems to be seeking out the unvaccinated and putting those at higher risk in hospital... Darwinian theory coming to reality. So please explain why Israel one of the most jabbed countries on earth are now the worlds covid hotspot with majority of Admissions to Hospital the Fully Vaxxed. Very very low covid next door in Egypt that use Ivermectin." I already have, we have always known that that time leads to a reduction in antibodies as it does in numerous vaccines... As for most admissions being the vaccinated... do I really have to explain the simple maths of a country nearing 98% vaccinated over the age of 18 having 9 out of 10 admissions or whatever it is being vaccinated is still a clear display that those unvaccinated are the huge at risk grouping? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x Yes a real load of crap posted here... but that is because people read newspapers rather than scientific journals and actually understand the problem. Headlines say one thing and are written with an agenda viewpoint... Science is science, 1 plus 1 = 2 still. No agenda. Believe the real evidence or the disinformation campaign who say you dont get the question if you oppose them yet they fail to show any real evidence to avoid the gold standard... If hospital avoided the gold standard in testing for cancer then I am sure everyone would be complaining so why the difference in standards... simple, humans are selfish... If the unvaccinated dont want the vaccine then get covid and get some cover but then dont complain when cancer services are reduced as a result of the increased healthcare demand either.... As a person who works in healthcare I will point out that the covid virus has been discriminatory in nature... it seems to be seeking out the unvaccinated and putting those at higher risk in hospital... Darwinian theory coming to reality. Why don't you enlighten us all with some of your scientific evidence. I'll leave mines below for you again the interest of fairness lol. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1" Take a look at your sources.. First lesson in looking at a paper is who wrote it, why, who paid for it... These are reporters and not scientists... So I can discard these articles straight away... Send me the references to the Lancet or BMJ etc...that they are based on, if they exist, and maybe then I can understand your viewpoint. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wait for it to come in officially and see what it actually means. As an example to attend football at Spurs you have to be prepared to show vaccine or negative proof, spot checks only. This is based on requirements from FA and government based on covid passes being required in the future. It then links to the nhs covid pass page, which states:- ‘NHS COVID Pass An NHS COVID Pass shows your coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination details or test results. This is your COVID-19 status. You may be asked to show your pass to travel abroad, or at events and venues in England asking for proof of your COVID-19 status. Always check the entry requirements for the country or the venue you're visiting’ This is how it is now, so until the official comes in it is not known if the COVID pass will continue in the same way or be vaccine only. What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for Vaccine passorts? I'm not interested in how they'll work logistically at the moment. I just want to know why they're necessary " I’ve already clearly told you... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x Yes a real load of crap posted here... but that is because people read newspapers rather than scientific journals and actually understand the problem. Headlines say one thing and are written with an agenda viewpoint... Science is science, 1 plus 1 = 2 still. No agenda. Believe the real evidence or the disinformation campaign who say you dont get the question if you oppose them yet they fail to show any real evidence to avoid the gold standard... If hospital avoided the gold standard in testing for cancer then I am sure everyone would be complaining so why the difference in standards... simple, humans are selfish... If the unvaccinated dont want the vaccine then get covid and get some cover but then dont complain when cancer services are reduced as a result of the increased healthcare demand either.... As a person who works in healthcare I will point out that the covid virus has been discriminatory in nature... it seems to be seeking out the unvaccinated and putting those at higher risk in hospital... Darwinian theory coming to reality. Why don't you enlighten us all with some of your scientific evidence. I'll leave mines below for you again the interest of fairness lol. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 Take a look at your sources.. First lesson in looking at a paper is who wrote it, why, who paid for it... These are reporters and not scientists... So I can discard these articles straight away... Send me the references to the Lancet or BMJ etc...that they are based on, if they exist, and maybe then I can understand your viewpoint." Lol. The study is from Oxford University! We also have real world data from Isreal. Again where is your evidence!!!! You've dismissed mines because you don't like it but you haven't provided any of your own. Where is the evidence that the vaccines reduce transmission? Please share it!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x Yes a real load of crap posted here... but that is because people read newspapers rather than scientific journals and actually understand the problem. Headlines say one thing and are written with an agenda viewpoint... Science is science, 1 plus 1 = 2 still. No agenda. Believe the real evidence or the disinformation campaign who say you dont get the question if you oppose them yet they fail to show any real evidence to avoid the gold standard... If hospital avoided the gold standard in testing for cancer then I am sure everyone would be complaining so why the difference in standards... simple, humans are selfish... If the unvaccinated dont want the vaccine then get covid and get some cover but then dont complain when cancer services are reduced as a result of the increased healthcare demand either.... As a person who works in healthcare I will point out that the covid virus has been discriminatory in nature... it seems to be seeking out the unvaccinated and putting those at higher risk in hospital... Darwinian theory coming to reality. So please explain why Israel one of the most jabbed countries on earth are now the worlds covid hotspot with majority of Admissions to Hospital the Fully Vaxxed. Very very low covid next door in Egypt that use Ivermectin. I already have, we have always known that that time leads to a reduction in antibodies as it does in numerous vaccines... As for most admissions being the vaccinated... do I really have to explain the simple maths of a country nearing 98% vaccinated over the age of 18 having 9 out of 10 admissions or whatever it is being vaccinated is still a clear display that those unvaccinated are the huge at risk grouping? " I did a study (not published) into the death rates at various ages with 28 days of infection. It was clear from the data that the vaccine works... though it did take till about March to start showing significant drop in elderly death rates due to variances such as needing to reach an adequate amount of vaccine in society in the age group to prevent infections and reduce symptoms... Plain and simple - IT WORKS... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wait for it to come in officially and see what it actually means. As an example to attend football at Spurs you have to be prepared to show vaccine or negative proof, spot checks only. This is based on requirements from FA and government based on covid passes being required in the future. It then links to the nhs covid pass page, which states:- ‘NHS COVID Pass An NHS COVID Pass shows your coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination details or test results. This is your COVID-19 status. You may be asked to show your pass to travel abroad, or at events and venues in England asking for proof of your COVID-19 status. Always check the entry requirements for the country or the venue you're visiting’ This is how it is now, so until the official comes in it is not known if the COVID pass will continue in the same way or be vaccine only. What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for Vaccine passorts? I'm not interested in how they'll work logistically at the moment. I just want to know why they're necessary " In my layman terms, those unknowingly carrying the virus without symptoms, attending a venue where they could unwittingly infect others. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x Yes a real load of crap posted here... but that is because people read newspapers rather than scientific journals and actually understand the problem. Headlines say one thing and are written with an agenda viewpoint... Science is science, 1 plus 1 = 2 still. No agenda. Believe the real evidence or the disinformation campaign who say you dont get the question if you oppose them yet they fail to show any real evidence to avoid the gold standard... If hospital avoided the gold standard in testing for cancer then I am sure everyone would be complaining so why the difference in standards... simple, humans are selfish... If the unvaccinated dont want the vaccine then get covid and get some cover but then dont complain when cancer services are reduced as a result of the increased healthcare demand either.... As a person who works in healthcare I will point out that the covid virus has been discriminatory in nature... it seems to be seeking out the unvaccinated and putting those at higher risk in hospital... Darwinian theory coming to reality. Why don't you enlighten us all with some of your scientific evidence. I'll leave mines below for you again the interest of fairness lol. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 Take a look at your sources.. First lesson in looking at a paper is who wrote it, why, who paid for it... These are reporters and not scientists... So I can discard these articles straight away... Send me the references to the Lancet or BMJ etc...that they are based on, if they exist, and maybe then I can understand your viewpoint." I'd agree with you if it wasn't for the fact that science and scientists are just as corruptible as journalists. Money can buy anything. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x Yes a real load of crap posted here... but that is because people read newspapers rather than scientific journals and actually understand the problem. Headlines say one thing and are written with an agenda viewpoint... Science is science, 1 plus 1 = 2 still. No agenda. Believe the real evidence or the disinformation campaign who say you dont get the question if you oppose them yet they fail to show any real evidence to avoid the gold standard... If hospital avoided the gold standard in testing for cancer then I am sure everyone would be complaining so why the difference in standards... simple, humans are selfish... If the unvaccinated dont want the vaccine then get covid and get some cover but then dont complain when cancer services are reduced as a result of the increased healthcare demand either.... As a person who works in healthcare I will point out that the covid virus has been discriminatory in nature... it seems to be seeking out the unvaccinated and putting those at higher risk in hospital... Darwinian theory coming to reality. Why don't you enlighten us all with some of your scientific evidence. I'll leave mines below for you again the interest of fairness lol. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 Take a look at your sources.. First lesson in looking at a paper is who wrote it, why, who paid for it... These are reporters and not scientists... So I can discard these articles straight away... Send me the references to the Lancet or BMJ etc...that they are based on, if they exist, and maybe then I can understand your viewpoint. Lol. The study is from Oxford University! We also have real world data from Isreal. Again where is your evidence!!!! You've dismissed mines because you don't like it but you haven't provided any of your own. Where is the evidence that the vaccines reduce transmission? Please share it!! " If you think that the Tories do things for any reason other than short term popularity and their own economic gain, you're not paying attention. What's the science behind their decision? Probably "a majority of people got the jab, it'll piss off a minority, and full venues bring in more revenue for our mates and more taxes for us to hand out to our mates". Is there science that might support such a proposal? I don't know. I'm not a scientist. Maybe to answer your question you should do your own research. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We are attending a large event in October and the event has stated nothing about a vaccine passport in its terms or conditions. See or post on the other "virus rethink" thread. We had to show jab cards at a "sold out" gig last night-yet there were empty seats everywhere so I assumed tickets bought by non jabbed patrons when they first went on sale went unused due to the venues policy." Lots of events and festivals require it now or you can’t enter | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wait for it to come in officially and see what it actually means. As an example to attend football at Spurs you have to be prepared to show vaccine or negative proof, spot checks only. This is based on requirements from FA and government based on covid passes being required in the future. It then links to the nhs covid pass page, which states:- ‘NHS COVID Pass An NHS COVID Pass shows your coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination details or test results. This is your COVID-19 status. You may be asked to show your pass to travel abroad, or at events and venues in England asking for proof of your COVID-19 status. Always check the entry requirements for the country or the venue you're visiting’ This is how it is now, so until the official comes in it is not known if the COVID pass will continue in the same way or be vaccine only. What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for Vaccine passorts? I'm not interested in how they'll work logistically at the moment. I just want to know why they're necessary In my layman terms, those unknowingly carrying the virus without symptoms, attending a venue where they could unwittingly infect others. " Surley testing would resolve that issue and not Vaccine passports? Why not increase testing if that's a genuine concern? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x Yes a real load of crap posted here... but that is because people read newspapers rather than scientific journals and actually understand the problem. Headlines say one thing and are written with an agenda viewpoint... Science is science, 1 plus 1 = 2 still. No agenda. Believe the real evidence or the disinformation campaign who say you dont get the question if you oppose them yet they fail to show any real evidence to avoid the gold standard... If hospital avoided the gold standard in testing for cancer then I am sure everyone would be complaining so why the difference in standards... simple, humans are selfish... If the unvaccinated dont want the vaccine then get covid and get some cover but then dont complain when cancer services are reduced as a result of the increased healthcare demand either.... As a person who works in healthcare I will point out that the covid virus has been discriminatory in nature... it seems to be seeking out the unvaccinated and putting those at higher risk in hospital... Darwinian theory coming to reality. Why don't you enlighten us all with some of your scientific evidence. I'll leave mines below for you again the interest of fairness lol. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 Take a look at your sources.. First lesson in looking at a paper is who wrote it, why, who paid for it... These are reporters and not scientists... So I can discard these articles straight away... Send me the references to the Lancet or BMJ etc...that they are based on, if they exist, and maybe then I can understand your viewpoint. Lol. The study is from Oxford University! We also have real world data from Isreal. Again where is your evidence!!!! You've dismissed mines because you don't like it but you haven't provided any of your own. Where is the evidence that the vaccines reduce transmission? Please share it!! If you think that the Tories do things for any reason other than short term popularity and their own economic gain, you're not paying attention. What's the science behind their decision? Probably "a majority of people got the jab, it'll piss off a minority, and full venues bring in more revenue for our mates and more taxes for us to hand out to our mates". Is there science that might support such a proposal? I don't know. I'm not a scientist. Maybe to answer your question you should do your own research." I've done my own research. I'll leave it below for you
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x Yes a real load of crap posted here... but that is because people read newspapers rather than scientific journals and actually understand the problem. Headlines say one thing and are written with an agenda viewpoint... Science is science, 1 plus 1 = 2 still. No agenda. Believe the real evidence or the disinformation campaign who say you dont get the question if you oppose them yet they fail to show any real evidence to avoid the gold standard... If hospital avoided the gold standard in testing for cancer then I am sure everyone would be complaining so why the difference in standards... simple, humans are selfish... If the unvaccinated dont want the vaccine then get covid and get some cover but then dont complain when cancer services are reduced as a result of the increased healthcare demand either.... As a person who works in healthcare I will point out that the covid virus has been discriminatory in nature... it seems to be seeking out the unvaccinated and putting those at higher risk in hospital... Darwinian theory coming to reality. Why don't you enlighten us all with some of your scientific evidence. I'll leave mines below for you again the interest of fairness lol. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 Take a look at your sources.. First lesson in looking at a paper is who wrote it, why, who paid for it... News agencies are NOT scientific reports. As for this Oxford study where was it published and who wrote it? These are reporters and not scientists... So I can discard these articles straight away... Send me the references to the Lancet or BMJ etc...that they are based on, if they exist, and maybe then I can understand your viewpoint. Lol. The study is from Oxford University! We also have real world data from Isreal. Again where is your evidence!!!! You've dismissed mines because you don't like it but you haven't provided any of your own. Where is the evidence that the vaccines reduce transmission? Please share it!! " There are plenty of research papers demonstrating that it appears to reduce the viral load and reduces infections, symptoms and deaths... Only an idiot would deny that. As for Israel there is a difference. Firstly they started vaccinating before we did, but they failed to do a booster. There was no evidence at the time to do this. We are planning to release the booster too so hopefully we should not see the Israeli scenario here. Dont get vaccinated and thee wont be a booster... If you are not vaccinated then you are supporting the outcome like in Israel of mass infections... Afterall to get the booster you NEED to be VACCINATED. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x Yes a real load of crap posted here... but that is because people read newspapers rather than scientific journals and actually understand the problem. Headlines say one thing and are written with an agenda viewpoint... Science is science, 1 plus 1 = 2 still. No agenda. Believe the real evidence or the disinformation campaign who say you dont get the question if you oppose them yet they fail to show any real evidence to avoid the gold standard... If hospital avoided the gold standard in testing for cancer then I am sure everyone would be complaining so why the difference in standards... simple, humans are selfish... If the unvaccinated dont want the vaccine then get covid and get some cover but then dont complain when cancer services are reduced as a result of the increased healthcare demand either.... As a person who works in healthcare I will point out that the covid virus has been discriminatory in nature... it seems to be seeking out the unvaccinated and putting those at higher risk in hospital... Darwinian theory coming to reality. Why don't you enlighten us all with some of your scientific evidence. I'll leave mines below for you again the interest of fairness lol. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 Take a look at your sources.. First lesson in looking at a paper is who wrote it, why, who paid for it... These are reporters and not scientists... So I can discard these articles straight away... Send me the references to the Lancet or BMJ etc...that they are based on, if they exist, and maybe then I can understand your viewpoint. Lol. The study is from Oxford University! We also have real world data from Isreal. Again where is your evidence!!!! You've dismissed mines because you don't like it but you haven't provided any of your own. Where is the evidence that the vaccines reduce transmission? Please share it!! If you think that the Tories do things for any reason other than short term popularity and their own economic gain, you're not paying attention. What's the science behind their decision? Probably "a majority of people got the jab, it'll piss off a minority, and full venues bring in more revenue for our mates and more taxes for us to hand out to our mates". Is there science that might support such a proposal? I don't know. I'm not a scientist. Maybe to answer your question you should do your own research. I've done my own research. I'll leave it below for you
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1
"Hmm. Do you really trust the mainstream media? Goodness. I'm neither that gullible nor easily led. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Let's be real, everyone wanted the lockdowns lifted and businesses to be able to reopen. Whatever you feel about the vaccine, it was and is the fastest way to be able to do that. Because besides the effect of the vaccine on the people that are vaccinated, it also gives people a sense of protection. There will have been millions scared shitless of returning to normal who more than likely wouldn't have without the vaccine being available. And returning businesses and returning consumers means money in the bank. And that, is how the world goes around. " Given what we know about the vaccines affect on transmission, what's the SCIENTIFIC basis for vacine passports? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x Yes a real load of crap posted here... but that is because people read newspapers rather than scientific journals and actually understand the problem. Headlines say one thing and are written with an agenda viewpoint... Science is science, 1 plus 1 = 2 still. No agenda. Believe the real evidence or the disinformation campaign who say you dont get the question if you oppose them yet they fail to show any real evidence to avoid the gold standard... If hospital avoided the gold standard in testing for cancer then I am sure everyone would be complaining so why the difference in standards... simple, humans are selfish... If the unvaccinated dont want the vaccine then get covid and get some cover but then dont complain when cancer services are reduced as a result of the increased healthcare demand either.... As a person who works in healthcare I will point out that the covid virus has been discriminatory in nature... it seems to be seeking out the unvaccinated and putting those at higher risk in hospital... Darwinian theory coming to reality. Why don't you enlighten us all with some of your scientific evidence. I'll leave mines below for you again the interest of fairness lol. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 Take a look at your sources.. First lesson in looking at a paper is who wrote it, why, who paid for it... These are reporters and not scientists... So I can discard these articles straight away... Send me the references to the Lancet or BMJ etc...that they are based on, if they exist, and maybe then I can understand your viewpoint. Lol. The study is from Oxford University! We also have real world data from Isreal. Again where is your evidence!!!! You've dismissed mines because you don't like it but you haven't provided any of your own. Where is the evidence that the vaccines reduce transmission? Please share it!! If you think that the Tories do things for any reason other than short term popularity and their own economic gain, you're not paying attention. What's the science behind their decision? Probably "a majority of people got the jab, it'll piss off a minority, and full venues bring in more revenue for our mates and more taxes for us to hand out to our mates". Is there science that might support such a proposal? I don't know. I'm not a scientist. Maybe to answer your question you should do your own research. I've done my own research. I'll leave it below for you
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1
Hmm. Do you really trust the mainstream media? Goodness. I'm neither that gullible nor easily led."Those are reports from a study at Oxford University. We also have data from Isreal to support these findings. One of the most vaccinated counties in the world is on one of the most heavily infected. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x Yes a real load of crap posted here... but that is because people read newspapers rather than scientific journals and actually understand the problem. Headlines say one thing and are written with an agenda viewpoint... Science is science, 1 plus 1 = 2 still. No agenda. Believe the real evidence or the disinformation campaign who say you dont get the question if you oppose them yet they fail to show any real evidence to avoid the gold standard... If hospital avoided the gold standard in testing for cancer then I am sure everyone would be complaining so why the difference in standards... simple, humans are selfish... If the unvaccinated dont want the vaccine then get covid and get some cover but then dont complain when cancer services are reduced as a result of the increased healthcare demand either.... As a person who works in healthcare I will point out that the covid virus has been discriminatory in nature... it seems to be seeking out the unvaccinated and putting those at higher risk in hospital... Darwinian theory coming to reality. Why don't you enlighten us all with some of your scientific evidence. I'll leave mines below for you again the interest of fairness lol. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 Take a look at your sources.. First lesson in looking at a paper is who wrote it, why, who paid for it... News agencies are NOT scientific reports. As for this Oxford study where was it published and who wrote it? These are reporters and not scientists... So I can discard these articles straight away... Send me the references to the Lancet or BMJ etc...that they are based on, if they exist, and maybe then I can understand your viewpoint. Lol. The study is from Oxford University! We also have real world data from Isreal. Again where is your evidence!!!! You've dismissed mines because you don't like it but you haven't provided any of your own. Where is the evidence that the vaccines reduce transmission? Please share it!! There are plenty of research papers demonstrating that it appears to reduce the viral load and reduces infections, symptoms and deaths... Only an idiot would deny that. As for Israel there is a difference. Firstly they started vaccinating before we did, but they failed to do a booster. There was no evidence at the time to do this. We are planning to release the booster too so hopefully we should not see the Israeli scenario here. Dont get vaccinated and thee wont be a booster... If you are not vaccinated then you are supporting the outcome like in Israel of mass infections... Afterall to get the booster you NEED to be VACCINATED. " Steady that's far to much common sense for a Sunday. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Despite ruling them out earlier this year, Nadhim Zahawi confirmed this morning that Covid passport's will the required to enter large venues from October. Given that we now KNOW that the Vaccines don't prevent transmission, what's the SCIENTIFIC basis for this? One a side note, recent data demonstrates that vaccinated people are more likely to catch the disease and transmit the same viral load as unvaccinated people once they do catch it. Have a look at the links below. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9959563/Ministers-confirm-vaccine-passports-required-large-venues.html https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 " Is viral load the right thing to look at. No expert but geek out on papers others use : "Results The delta variant (B.1.617.2) was identified in the majority of cases. Despite similar Ct-values, we demonstrate lower probability of infectious virus detection in respiratory samples of vaccinated HCWs with breakthrough infections compared to unvaccinated HCWs with primary SARS-CoV-2 infections. Nevertheless, infectious virus was found in 68.6% of breakthrough infections and Ct-values decreased throughout the first 3 days of illness." https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.20.21262158v1 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x Yes a real load of crap posted here... but that is because people read newspapers rather than scientific journals and actually understand the problem. Headlines say one thing and are written with an agenda viewpoint... Science is science, 1 plus 1 = 2 still. No agenda. Believe the real evidence or the disinformation campaign who say you dont get the question if you oppose them yet they fail to show any real evidence to avoid the gold standard... If hospital avoided the gold standard in testing for cancer then I am sure everyone would be complaining so why the difference in standards... simple, humans are selfish... If the unvaccinated dont want the vaccine then get covid and get some cover but then dont complain when cancer services are reduced as a result of the increased healthcare demand either.... As a person who works in healthcare I will point out that the covid virus has been discriminatory in nature... it seems to be seeking out the unvaccinated and putting those at higher risk in hospital... Darwinian theory coming to reality. Why don't you enlighten us all with some of your scientific evidence. I'll leave mines below for you again the interest of fairness lol. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 Take a look at your sources.. First lesson in looking at a paper is who wrote it, why, who paid for it... These are reporters and not scientists... So I can discard these articles straight away... Send me the references to the Lancet or BMJ etc...that they are based on, if they exist, and maybe then I can understand your viewpoint. Lol. The study is from Oxford University! We also have real world data from Isreal. Again where is your evidence!!!! You've dismissed mines because you don't like it but you haven't provided any of your own. Where is the evidence that the vaccines reduce transmission? Please share it!! If you think that the Tories do things for any reason other than short term popularity and their own economic gain, you're not paying attention. What's the science behind their decision? Probably "a majority of people got the jab, it'll piss off a minority, and full venues bring in more revenue for our mates and more taxes for us to hand out to our mates". Is there science that might support such a proposal? I don't know. I'm not a scientist. Maybe to answer your question you should do your own research. I've done my own research. I'll leave it below for you
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1
Hmm. Do you really trust the mainstream media? Goodness. I'm neither that gullible nor easily led.
Those are reports from a study at Oxford University. We also have data from Isreal to support these findings. One of the most vaccinated counties in the world is on one of the most heavily infected. "The media has been twisting the data repeatedly from the beginning, reporting things selectively and not others, being misleading, etc. I thought only the sheeple relied on the MSM. I'm no sheeple, and I certainly do not. But if you think that you've answered your own question, more power to you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Let's be real, everyone wanted the lockdowns lifted and businesses to be able to reopen. Whatever you feel about the vaccine, it was and is the fastest way to be able to do that. Because besides the effect of the vaccine on the people that are vaccinated, it also gives people a sense of protection. There will have been millions scared shitless of returning to normal who more than likely wouldn't have without the vaccine being available. And returning businesses and returning consumers means money in the bank. And that, is how the world goes around. Given what we know about the vaccines affect on transmission, what's the SCIENTIFIC basis for vacine passports?" I'm going to be very honest with you. Science has nothing really to do with it, but business does. It got businesses open quickly, and made people feel safer which means more people back out spending. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"For me the bottom line is, the government are gonna do what they're gonna do. They'll probably lie about why. Fuck all I can do about it. I had no hand in their decision making process - I suspect, reading between the lines, that it was a decision they came to months ago. " Absolutely (not just in the UK btw) and I choose to no long worry about things I cannot influence. I did not vote for this government either so I kind of wash my hands. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So OP, to borrow your phrase: STOP DODGING THE QUESTION!!! What is the single factor that has allowed the U.K. to remain out of lockdown and have a controllable admission rate despite the rise in infections we have seen during the past 6 months? It’s quite a critical point in your discussion so please have a go at answering it for us all? " This post is about Mandatory vaccines. I've NEVER said that I have any issues fundamentally with Vaccines. I just can't see why, given what we now know about transmission, we need to introduce Vaccine passports. Can you present an argument, rooted in SCIENCE, for Vaccine passports? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Let's be real, everyone wanted the lockdowns lifted and businesses to be able to reopen. Whatever you feel about the vaccine, it was and is the fastest way to be able to do that. Because besides the effect of the vaccine on the people that are vaccinated, it also gives people a sense of protection. There will have been millions scared shitless of returning to normal who more than likely wouldn't have without the vaccine being available. And returning businesses and returning consumers means money in the bank. And that, is how the world goes around. Given what we know about the vaccines affect on transmission, what's the SCIENTIFIC basis for vacine passports? I'm going to be very honest with you. Science has nothing really to do with it, but business does. It got businesses open quickly, and made people feel safer which means more people back out spending. " I appreciate your honestly!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lord there’s a right load of old crap posted on this thread... This was announced 3 months ago, as we are now in September the legislation has come into play although a huge number of venues already have the system up and running anyway. If it means some folk will sit at home and make tinfoil hats whilst the rest of us club etc... no issue x Yes a real load of crap posted here... but that is because people read newspapers rather than scientific journals and actually understand the problem. Headlines say one thing and are written with an agenda viewpoint... Science is science, 1 plus 1 = 2 still. No agenda. Believe the real evidence or the disinformation campaign who say you dont get the question if you oppose them yet they fail to show any real evidence to avoid the gold standard... If hospital avoided the gold standard in testing for cancer then I am sure everyone would be complaining so why the difference in standards... simple, humans are selfish... If the unvaccinated dont want the vaccine then get covid and get some cover but then dont complain when cancer services are reduced as a result of the increased healthcare demand either.... As a person who works in healthcare I will point out that the covid virus has been discriminatory in nature... it seems to be seeking out the unvaccinated and putting those at higher risk in hospital... Darwinian theory coming to reality. Why don't you enlighten us all with some of your scientific evidence. I'll leave mines below for you again the interest of fairness lol. https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 Take a look at your sources.. First lesson in looking at a paper is who wrote it, why, who paid for it... These are reporters and not scientists... So I can discard these articles straight away... Send me the references to the Lancet or BMJ etc...that they are based on, if they exist, and maybe then I can understand your viewpoint. Lol. The study is from Oxford University! We also have real world data from Isreal. Again where is your evidence!!!! You've dismissed mines because you don't like it but you haven't provided any of your own. Where is the evidence that the vaccines reduce transmission? Please share it!! If you think that the Tories do things for any reason other than short term popularity and their own economic gain, you're not paying attention. What's the science behind their decision? Probably "a majority of people got the jab, it'll piss off a minority, and full venues bring in more revenue for our mates and more taxes for us to hand out to our mates". Is there science that might support such a proposal? I don't know. I'm not a scientist. Maybe to answer your question you should do your own research. I've done my own research. I'll leave it below for you
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1
Hmm. Do you really trust the mainstream media? Goodness. I'm neither that gullible nor easily led.
Those are reports from a study at Oxford University. We also have data from Isreal to support these findings. One of the most vaccinated counties in the world is on one of the most heavily infected. "From the ou study "However, the degree to which this [similar viral loads] might translate into new infections is unclear; a greater percentage of virus may be non-viable in those vaccinated, and/or their viral loads may also decline faster as suggested by a recent study of patients hospitalised with Delta31 (supported by associations between higher Ct and higher antibody levels here and in35), leading to shorter periods “at risk” for onwards transmission. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wonder what the statistical relationship is between anti-vacciners and brexitiers. " That's not what this post is about. Please don't try to distract people. All I asked was for a SCIENTIFIC argument in favour of Vaccine Passports. Can you provide one? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So OP, to borrow your phrase: STOP DODGING THE QUESTION!!! What is the single factor that has allowed the U.K. to remain out of lockdown and have a controllable admission rate despite the rise in infections we have seen during the past 6 months? It’s quite a critical point in your discussion so please have a go at answering it for us all? This post is about Mandatory vaccines. I've NEVER said that I have any issues fundamentally with Vaccines. I just can't see why, given what we now know about transmission, we need to introduce Vaccine passports. Can you present an argument, rooted in SCIENCE, for Vaccine passports?" A mandatory vaccine would be "get the jab or face prison". Or even "get the jab or we'll hold you down" We are so far away from that it's not even funny. The hysterics in the arguments sometimes really baffle me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected. "6 times more likely to get infected than who? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wait for it to come in officially and see what it actually means. As an example to attend football at Spurs you have to be prepared to show vaccine or negative proof, spot checks only. This is based on requirements from FA and government based on covid passes being required in the future. It then links to the nhs covid pass page, which states:- ‘NHS COVID Pass An NHS COVID Pass shows your coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination details or test results. This is your COVID-19 status. You may be asked to show your pass to travel abroad, or at events and venues in England asking for proof of your COVID-19 status. Always check the entry requirements for the country or the venue you're visiting’ This is how it is now, so until the official comes in it is not known if the COVID pass will continue in the same way or be vaccine only. What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for Vaccine passorts? I'm not interested in how they'll work logistically at the moment. I just want to know why they're necessary In my layman terms, those unknowingly carrying the virus without symptoms, attending a venue where they could unwittingly infect others. Surley testing would resolve that issue and not Vaccine passports? Why not increase testing if that's a genuine concern?" As per the covid pass a negative test is included as an option, hence why I said at the beginning wait until what is proposed in black & white before saying it is vaccines only. Personally I’d prefer a negative test as entry rather than someone just having the vaccine but no recent test. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So OP, to borrow your phrase: STOP DODGING THE QUESTION!!! What is the single factor that has allowed the U.K. to remain out of lockdown and have a controllable admission rate despite the rise in infections we have seen during the past 6 months? It’s quite a critical point in your discussion so please have a go at answering it for us all? This post is about Mandatory vaccines. I've NEVER said that I have any issues fundamentally with Vaccines. I just can't see why, given what we now know about transmission, we need to introduce Vaccine passports. Can you present an argument, rooted in SCIENCE, for Vaccine passports? A mandatory vaccine would be "get the jab or face prison". Or even "get the jab or we'll hold you down" We are so far away from that it's not even funny. The hysterics in the arguments sometimes really baffle me." Why do we need Vaccine Passports? Please present an argument rooted in SCIENCE | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So OP, to borrow your phrase: STOP DODGING THE QUESTION!!! What is the single factor that has allowed the U.K. to remain out of lockdown and have a controllable admission rate despite the rise in infections we have seen during the past 6 months? It’s quite a critical point in your discussion so please have a go at answering it for us all? This post is about Mandatory vaccines. I've NEVER said that I have any issues fundamentally with Vaccines. I just can't see why, given what we now know about transmission, we need to introduce Vaccine passports. Can you present an argument, rooted in SCIENCE, for Vaccine passports? A mandatory vaccine would be "get the jab or face prison". Or even "get the jab or we'll hold you down" We are so far away from that it's not even funny. The hysterics in the arguments sometimes really baffle me. Why do we need Vaccine Passports? Please present an argument rooted in SCIENCE " I don't know. I've already said that. The government can do what it likes, and clearly it is doing so. If you want to know why the government can do what it likes, you need to go to UK constitutional law. The term you're looking for is "parliamentary supremacy". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So OP, to borrow your phrase: STOP DODGING THE QUESTION!!! What is the single factor that has allowed the U.K. to remain out of lockdown and have a controllable admission rate despite the rise in infections we have seen during the past 6 months? It’s quite a critical point in your discussion so please have a go at answering it for us all? This post is about Mandatory vaccines. I've NEVER said that I have any issues fundamentally with Vaccines. I just can't see why, given what we now know about transmission, we need to introduce Vaccine passports. Can you present an argument, rooted in SCIENCE, for Vaccine passports?" Right so you clearly agree that the vaccination programme has created a majority grouping of people who scientifically are far less risk to the general public or indeed the NHS’s resources. Do you have an issue with the limitations placed on me as an NHS worker? I am required to be vaccinated against Hepatitis, I must receive a booster every five years. Also as someone who in theory could be treating you and your open wounds I am also obliged to be screened against HIV and Hepatitis on an annual basis.... is this an assault on my human rights? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So OP, to borrow your phrase: STOP DODGING THE QUESTION!!! What is the single factor that has allowed the U.K. to remain out of lockdown and have a controllable admission rate despite the rise in infections we have seen during the past 6 months? It’s quite a critical point in your discussion so please have a go at answering it for us all? This post is about Mandatory vaccines. I've NEVER said that I have any issues fundamentally with Vaccines. I just can't see why, given what we now know about transmission, we need to introduce Vaccine passports. Can you present an argument, rooted in SCIENCE, for Vaccine passports? A mandatory vaccine would be "get the jab or face prison". Or even "get the jab or we'll hold you down" We are so far away from that it's not even funny. The hysterics in the arguments sometimes really baffle me." Hmm, that's a bit disingenuous. While the vaccines may not be mandatory they are definitely backed up with the threat of a person who chooses not to take it possibly losing their jobs and access to certain bits of society. You may reply with, well that's their choice, but it really isn't, anyone that wants to return to free life has to pass through the hoop the government have made the single condition of entry back to free life. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
6 times more likely to get infected than who?"https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wonder what the statistical relationship is between anti-vacciners and brexitiers. That's not what this post is about. Please don't try to distract people. All I asked was for a SCIENTIFIC argument in favour of Vaccine Passports. Can you provide one?" a card with your name and number on saying when you had the jabs | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So OP, to borrow your phrase: STOP DODGING THE QUESTION!!! What is the single factor that has allowed the U.K. to remain out of lockdown and have a controllable admission rate despite the rise in infections we have seen during the past 6 months? It’s quite a critical point in your discussion so please have a go at answering it for us all? This post is about Mandatory vaccines. I've NEVER said that I have any issues fundamentally with Vaccines. I just can't see why, given what we now know about transmission, we need to introduce Vaccine passports. Can you present an argument, rooted in SCIENCE, for Vaccine passports? A mandatory vaccine would be "get the jab or face prison". Or even "get the jab or we'll hold you down" We are so far away from that it's not even funny. The hysterics in the arguments sometimes really baffle me. Hmm, that's a bit disingenuous. While the vaccines may not be mandatory they are definitely backed up with the threat of a person who chooses not to take it possibly losing their jobs and access to certain bits of society. You may reply with, well that's their choice, but it really isn't, anyone that wants to return to free life has to pass through the hoop the government have made the single condition of entry back to free life." Precisely!! Some people would rather get into an argument about semantics than address the question in the original post. I wonder why? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"“ If your customer confirms that they have a self declared exemption, but is unable to show any evidence, you should allow them access to your venue or event. You must not ask for proof of their medical exemption and it is not essential they show any form of exemption card at any point.”" I've seen people use this. I can be found on the NHS website. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So OP, to borrow your phrase: STOP DODGING THE QUESTION!!! What is the single factor that has allowed the U.K. to remain out of lockdown and have a controllable admission rate despite the rise in infections we have seen during the past 6 months? It’s quite a critical point in your discussion so please have a go at answering it for us all? This post is about Mandatory vaccines. I've NEVER said that I have any issues fundamentally with Vaccines. I just can't see why, given what we now know about transmission, we need to introduce Vaccine passports. Can you present an argument, rooted in SCIENCE, for Vaccine passports? A mandatory vaccine would be "get the jab or face prison". Or even "get the jab or we'll hold you down" We are so far away from that it's not even funny. The hysterics in the arguments sometimes really baffle me. Hmm, that's a bit disingenuous. While the vaccines may not be mandatory they are definitely backed up with the threat of a person who chooses not to take it possibly losing their jobs and access to certain bits of society. You may reply with, well that's their choice, but it really isn't, anyone that wants to return to free life has to pass through the hoop the government have made the single condition of entry back to free life." Society comes with requirements. Those requirements change over time. I generally am expected to be clothed when I leave the house. I have to respect people's personal space. I have to pay taxes. This is a new requirement created as a result of an ongoing public health crisis. But it's easily avoidable. Just don't do these very small group of things. I think you'll find it's not desperately life limiting. Could it be a slippery slope? So. Sure could anything. Gay marriage might lead to people marrying laptops. Taxes might lead to the government taking all your money. Imprisonment might lead to political rather than criminal prosecution and persecution. Me not being considered for employment as a neurosurgeon in the NHS might lead to me being unemployable. Obviously I don't find the slippery slope or thin edge of the wedge arguments compelling. They're often logical fallacies | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
6 times more likely to get infected than who?
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1"You can’t tell me? I read those articles. I wanted you to tell me as you seemed to indicate that you were 6 times more likely to get infected if vaccinated than if you were unvaccinated. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wait for it to come in officially and see what it actually means. As an example to attend football at Spurs you have to be prepared to show vaccine or negative proof, spot checks only. This is based on requirements from FA and government based on covid passes being required in the future. It then links to the nhs covid pass page, which states:- ‘NHS COVID Pass An NHS COVID Pass shows your coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination details or test results. This is your COVID-19 status. You may be asked to show your pass to travel abroad, or at events and venues in England asking for proof of your COVID-19 status. Always check the entry requirements for the country or the venue you're visiting’ This is how it is now, so until the official comes in it is not known if the COVID pass will continue in the same way or be vaccine only. What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for Vaccine passorts? I'm not interested in how they'll work logistically at the moment. I just want to know why they're necessary In my layman terms, those unknowingly carrying the virus without symptoms, attending a venue where they could unwittingly infect others. Surley testing would resolve that issue and not Vaccine passports? Why not increase testing if that's a genuine concern? As per the covid pass a negative test is included as an option, hence why I said at the beginning wait until what is proposed in black & white before saying it is vaccines only. Personally I’d prefer a negative test as entry rather than someone just having the vaccine but no recent test. " Me too but unfortunately the legislation is saying 2 jabs or no entry, and not asking for or accepting a recent negative lateral flow test. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"“ If your customer confirms that they have a self declared exemption, but is unable to show any evidence, you should allow them access to your venue or event. You must not ask for proof of their medical exemption and it is not essential they show any form of exemption card at any point.”" I expect in the fullness of time this will be abused by criminals. As mask exemptions have been abused - and admitted to being abused - by the whiny, pathetic little crybabies who were too weak to put some cloth on their face. Cowering behind the vulnerable because they can't be arsed. Of course the criminal justice system will have to adapt. And probably the passports too. Eligible, not eligible. No need for medical conditions to be revealed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wonder what the statistical relationship is between anti-vacciners and brexitiers. That's not what this post is about. Please don't try to distract people. All I asked was for a SCIENTIFIC argument in favour of Vaccine Passports. Can you provide one?" This is only my opinion why I am in favour of vaccine passports. It is based on behavioural science. Why for example before noone was allowed to congregate to open public spaces? Because they knew that if they did not ban this, a lot of people would go, no social distancing and more likely for the virus to spread. For the same reason (again this is my opinion) the unvaccinated and even more the antivaxxers, the covid deniers and the conspiracy theorists will not be careful or as careful as the vaccinated inside these venues. It may be a generalisation, there may be some exceptions on both sides but this is how it is. Therefore, at this point I am in favour of the covid passports. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
6 times more likely to get infected than who?
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1
You can’t tell me? I read those articles. I wanted you to tell me as you seemed to indicate that you were 6 times more likely to get infected if vaccinated than if you were unvaccinated.""By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave." Have another read of the articles. You've clearly missed some of the most important bits | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Me too but unfortunately the legislation is saying 2 jabs or no entry, and not asking for or accepting a recent negative lateral flow test." The demand on testing would be huge... each premier league football match and average of 40k tests required, a concert a few thousand more etc.. The logistics don’t add up, the tests we have are also needed for the jobs which rely so heavily on them. Then there’s a whole question of the admin time to process guest lists compared to to electronic passport that already has the infrastructure in place to do it. Far easier and more effective to do it based on vaccination. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wonder what the statistical relationship is between anti-vacciners and brexitiers. That's not what this post is about. Please don't try to distract people. All I asked was for a SCIENTIFIC argument in favour of Vaccine Passports. Can you provide one? This is only my opinion why I am in favour of vaccine passports. It is based on behavioural science. Why for example before noone was allowed to congregate to open public spaces? Because they knew that if they did not ban this, a lot of people would go, no social distancing and more likely for the virus to spread. For the same reason (again this is my opinion) the unvaccinated and even more the antivaxxers, the covid deniers and the conspiracy theorists will not be careful or as careful as the vaccinated inside these venues. It may be a generalisation, there may be some exceptions on both sides but this is how it is. Therefore, at this point I am in favour of the covid passports." Lol. "Behavioural science". Clutching at straws now. Any scientific evidence for any of the claims you made? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
6 times more likely to get infected than who?
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1
You can’t tell me? I read those articles. I wanted you to tell me as you seemed to indicate that you were 6 times more likely to get infected if vaccinated than if you were unvaccinated.
"By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave." Have another read of the articles. You've clearly missed some of the most important bits "Please explain what you think this means, in your own words. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Me too but unfortunately the legislation is saying 2 jabs or no entry, and not asking for or accepting a recent negative lateral flow test. The demand on testing would be huge... each premier league football match and average of 40k tests required, a concert a few thousand more etc.. The logistics don’t add up, the tests we have are also needed for the jobs which rely so heavily on them. Then there’s a whole question of the admin time to process guest lists compared to to electronic passport that already has the infrastructure in place to do it. Far easier and more effective to do it based on vaccination. " Another argument based on "logistics". I asked for arguments based on SCIENCE. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wonder what the statistical relationship is between anti-vacciners and brexitiers. That's not what this post is about. Please don't try to distract people. All I asked was for a SCIENTIFIC argument in favour of Vaccine Passports. Can you provide one? This is only my opinion why I am in favour of vaccine passports. It is based on behavioural science. Why for example before noone was allowed to congregate to open public spaces? Because they knew that if they did not ban this, a lot of people would go, no social distancing and more likely for the virus to spread. For the same reason (again this is my opinion) the unvaccinated and even more the antivaxxers, the covid deniers and the conspiracy theorists will not be careful or as careful as the vaccinated inside these venues. It may be a generalisation, there may be some exceptions on both sides but this is how it is. Therefore, at this point I am in favour of the covid passports. Lol. "Behavioural science". Clutching at straws now. Any scientific evidence for any of the claims you made? " Is there a reason why you think swingers are the best people to provide a purely hard scientific answer? (Virological or epidemiological? Presumably it makes a difference which discipline we look from) Do you think that behaviour - and thus the study of it - doesn't have an effect on viral transmission? Why would behavioural science be irrelevant? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave." Have another read of the articles. You've clearly missed some of the most important bits " I think you’re missing the point... the article talks about the prolonged resistance for those who’ve suffered covid compared to those vaccinated. The missing space is both those groups remain far less at risk compared to the unvaccinated who’ve not been infected. Are you actually suggesting we should have another crack at here immunity you toughen us all up? We tested that theory early doors and had to slam the brakes on before we had people dying in the streets. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wait for it to come in officially and see what it actually means. As an example to attend football at Spurs you have to be prepared to show vaccine or negative proof, spot checks only. This is based on requirements from FA and government based on covid passes being required in the future. It then links to the nhs covid pass page, which states:- ‘NHS COVID Pass An NHS COVID Pass shows your coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination details or test results. This is your COVID-19 status. You may be asked to show your pass to travel abroad, or at events and venues in England asking for proof of your COVID-19 status. Always check the entry requirements for the country or the venue you're visiting’ This is how it is now, so until the official comes in it is not known if the COVID pass will continue in the same way or be vaccine only. What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for Vaccine passorts? I'm not interested in how they'll work logistically at the moment. I just want to know why they're necessary In my layman terms, those unknowingly carrying the virus without symptoms, attending a venue where they could unwittingly infect others. Surley testing would resolve that issue and not Vaccine passports? Why not increase testing if that's a genuine concern? As per the covid pass a negative test is included as an option, hence why I said at the beginning wait until what is proposed in black & white before saying it is vaccines only. Personally I’d prefer a negative test as entry rather than someone just having the vaccine but no recent test. Me too but unfortunately the legislation is saying 2 jabs or no entry, and not asking for or accepting a recent negative lateral flow test." Yes I saw that, but will be interesting to see if they get it through as a lot also want a negative test to remain as an option. Time will tell | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wonder what the statistical relationship is between anti-vacciners and brexitiers. That's not what this post is about. Please don't try to distract people. All I asked was for a SCIENTIFIC argument in favour of Vaccine Passports. Can you provide one? This is only my opinion why I am in favour of vaccine passports. It is based on behavioural science. Why for example before noone was allowed to congregate to open public spaces? Because they knew that if they did not ban this, a lot of people would go, no social distancing and more likely for the virus to spread. For the same reason (again this is my opinion) the unvaccinated and even more the antivaxxers, the covid deniers and the conspiracy theorists will not be careful or as careful as the vaccinated inside these venues. It may be a generalisation, there may be some exceptions on both sides but this is how it is. Therefore, at this point I am in favour of the covid passports. Lol. "Behavioural science". Clutching at straws now. Any scientific evidence for any of the claims you made? " Do you think the decision to control the crowds was taken based on MEDICAL science? It was because if these things were not banned, surely people would gather there. Such patterns are predictable. Anyway I gave you my explanation. Unvaccinated people inside such venues will be less likely to be careful. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
6 times more likely to get infected than who?
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1
You can’t tell me? I read those articles. I wanted you to tell me as you seemed to indicate that you were 6 times more likely to get infected if vaccinated than if you were unvaccinated.
"By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave." Have another read of the articles. You've clearly missed some of the most important bits "Nope I didn’t miss anything. I knew it was stating that it claims you are 6 times more likely to get reinfected if vaccinated as opposed to those who had previously been infected. I was pointing out that you didn’t clarify who the two groups were. Do you think it would be best to give a jab of the virus to the unvaccinated as they will then have less chance of being reinfected (especially if they are dead)! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Me too but unfortunately the legislation is saying 2 jabs or no entry, and not asking for or accepting a recent negative lateral flow test. The demand on testing would be huge... each premier league football match and average of 40k tests required, a concert a few thousand more etc.. The logistics don’t add up, the tests we have are also needed for the jobs which rely so heavily on them. Then there’s a whole question of the admin time to process guest lists compared to to electronic passport that already has the infrastructure in place to do it. Far easier and more effective to do it based on vaccination. Another argument based on "logistics". I asked for arguments based on SCIENCE. " You have already had answers from two healthcare professionals which have explained the science. You rebuttals have lost traction, and you now repetitive. Any credibility that you held in your original question is now diminishing quickly. I now await the cut and paste link's  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nope I didn’t miss anything. I knew it was stating that it claims you are 6 times more likely to get reinfected if vaccinated as opposed to those who had previously been infected. I was pointing out that you didn’t clarify who the two groups were. Do you think it would be best to give a jab of the virus to the unvaccinated as they will then have less chance of being reinfected (especially if they are dead)!" I am shitting myself with excitement over his scientifically considered answer... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"However, the degree to which this might translate into new infections is unclear; a greater percentage of virus may be non-viable in those vaccinated, and/or their viral loads may also decline faster as suggested by a recent study of patients hospitalised with Delta31 (supported by associations between higher Ct and higher antibody levels here and in35), leading to shorter periods “at risk” for onwards transmission." But that isn't evidence for I admit. However I have seen this: "The delta variant (B.1.617.2) was identified in the majority of cases. Despite similar Ct-values, we demonstrate lower probability of infectious virus detection in respiratory samples of vaccinated HCWs with breakthrough infections compared to unvaccinated HCWs with primary SARS-CoV-2 infections. Nevertheless, infectious virus was found in 68.6% of breakthrough infections and Ct-values decreased throughout the first 3 days of illness. " https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.20.21262158v1 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave." Have another read of the articles. You've clearly missed some of the most important bits I think you’re missing the point... the article talks about the prolonged resistance for those who’ve suffered covid compared to those vaccinated. The missing space is both those groups remain far less at risk compared to the unvaccinated who’ve not been infected. Are you actually suggesting we should have another crack at here immunity you toughen us all up? We tested that theory early doors and had to slam the brakes on before we had people dying in the streets." Over 90% of people now have antibodies. Have a look at the link below. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19latestinsights/antibodies | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suspect that for many this is an ethical rather than scientific argument so even with evidence many won't change their position. Especially towards pro passports. But to have a bit of fun I suspect there's two parts of science to decide of there is a case. First is strain on healthcare etc. Vaccines help reduce the risk of infection and severity. I believe tej OU study shows this. So keeping high risk ppl out of high risk areas serves public benefit even if individuals are willing to take the risk. (That was the principal behind lock down) Second is reduce transmission. You cite the OU report. That didn't conclude no reduction. However, the degree to which this might translate into new infections is unclear; a greater percentage of virus may be non-viable in those vaccinated, and/or their viral loads may also decline faster as suggested by a recent study of patients hospitalised with Delta31 (supported by associations between higher Ct and higher antibody levels here and in35), leading to shorter periods “at risk” for onwards transmission. But that isn't evidence for I admit. However I have seen this: The delta variant (B.1.617.2) was identified in the majority of cases. Despite similar Ct-values, we demonstrate lower probability of infectious virus detection in respiratory samples of vaccinated HCWs with breakthrough infections compared to unvaccinated HCWs with primary SARS-CoV-2 infections. Nevertheless, infectious virus was found in 68.6% of breakthrough infections and Ct-values decreased throughout the first 3 days of illness. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.20.21262158v1" You said "so even with evidence many won't change their position". That's the most frightening part!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
6 times more likely to get infected than who?
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1
You can’t tell me? I read those articles. I wanted you to tell me as you seemed to indicate that you were 6 times more likely to get infected if vaccinated than if you were unvaccinated.
"By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave." Have another read of the articles. You've clearly missed some of the most important bits
Nope I didn’t miss anything. I knew it was stating that it claims you are 6 times more likely to get reinfected if vaccinated as opposed to those who had previously been infected. I was pointing out that you didn’t clarify who the two groups were. Do you think it would be best to give a jab of the virus to the unvaccinated as they will then have less chance of being reinfected (especially if they are dead)!"You asked "Do you think it would be best to give a jab of the virus to the unvaccinated as they will then have less chance of being reinfected (especially if they are dead)!" Can you clarify what you mean by this? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wait for it to come in officially and see what it actually means. As an example to attend football at Spurs you have to be prepared to show vaccine or negative proof, spot checks only. This is based on requirements from FA and government based on covid passes being required in the future. It then links to the nhs covid pass page, which states:- ‘NHS COVID Pass An NHS COVID Pass shows your coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination details or test results. This is your COVID-19 status. You may be asked to show your pass to travel abroad, or at events and venues in England asking for proof of your COVID-19 status. Always check the entry requirements for the country or the venue you're visiting’ This is how it is now, so until the official comes in it is not known if the COVID pass will continue in the same way or be vaccine only. What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for Vaccine passorts? I'm not interested in how they'll work logistically at the moment. I just want to know why they're necessary In my layman terms, those unknowingly carrying the virus without symptoms, attending a venue where they could unwittingly infect others. Surley testing would resolve that issue and not Vaccine passports? Why not increase testing if that's a genuine concern? As per the covid pass a negative test is included as an option, hence why I said at the beginning wait until what is proposed in black & white before saying it is vaccines only. Personally I’d prefer a negative test as entry rather than someone just having the vaccine but no recent test. Me too but unfortunately the legislation is saying 2 jabs or no entry, and not asking for or accepting a recent negative lateral flow test." Very sad | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave." Have another read of the articles. You've clearly missed some of the most important bits I think you’re missing the point... the article talks about the prolonged resistance for those who’ve suffered covid compared to those vaccinated. The missing space is both those groups remain far less at risk compared to the unvaccinated who’ve not been infected. Are you actually suggesting we should have another crack at here immunity you toughen us all up? We tested that theory early doors and had to slam the brakes on before we had people dying in the streets. Over 90% of people now have antibodies. Have a look at the link below. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19latestinsights/antibodies" That figure is an estimate. However: ‘The presence of antibodies to COVID-19 suggests that a person previously had the infection or has been vaccinated.’ So you are now in favour of vaccinations? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Over 90% of people now have antibodies. Have a look at the link below. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19latestinsights/antibodies" We come full circle... I quote “due to previous infection and/or vaccination”. Did you just actually give yourself the SCIENTIFIC DATA to support the roll out of the passport scheme? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave." Have another read of the articles. You've clearly missed some of the most important bits I think you’re missing the point... the article talks about the prolonged resistance for those who’ve suffered covid compared to those vaccinated. The missing space is both those groups remain far less at risk compared to the unvaccinated who’ve not been infected. Are you actually suggesting we should have another crack at here immunity you toughen us all up? We tested that theory early doors and had to slam the brakes on before we had people dying in the streets." Over 90% of people now have antibodies so there isn't much "missing space" lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suspect that for many this is an ethical rather than scientific argument so even with evidence many won't change their position. Especially towards pro passports. But to have a bit of fun I suspect there's two parts of science to decide of there is a case. First is strain on healthcare etc. Vaccines help reduce the risk of infection and severity. I believe tej OU study shows this. So keeping high risk ppl out of high risk areas serves public benefit even if individuals are willing to take the risk. (That was the principal behind lock down) Second is reduce transmission. You cite the OU report. That didn't conclude no reduction. However, the degree to which this might translate into new infections is unclear; a greater percentage of virus may be non-viable in those vaccinated, and/or their viral loads may also decline faster as suggested by a recent study of patients hospitalised with Delta31 (supported by associations between higher Ct and higher antibody levels here and in35), leading to shorter periods “at risk” for onwards transmission. But that isn't evidence for I admit. However I have seen this: The delta variant (B.1.617.2) was identified in the majority of cases. Despite similar Ct-values, we demonstrate lower probability of infectious virus detection in respiratory samples of vaccinated HCWs with breakthrough infections compared to unvaccinated HCWs with primary SARS-CoV-2 infections. Nevertheless, infectious virus was found in 68.6% of breakthrough infections and Ct-values decreased throughout the first 3 days of illness. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.20.21262158v1 You said "so even with evidence many won't change their position". That's the most frightening part!! " I suspect that's how moat people work in practice. If vaccines reduced transmission would you be pro passports ? And if so, how much reduction? A 1pc? I say this as someone who feels uncomfortable with passports despite posting the above !! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
6 times more likely to get infected than who?
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1
You can’t tell me? I read those articles. I wanted you to tell me as you seemed to indicate that you were 6 times more likely to get infected if vaccinated than if you were unvaccinated.
"By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave." Have another read of the articles. You've clearly missed some of the most important bits
Nope I didn’t miss anything. I knew it was stating that it claims you are 6 times more likely to get reinfected if vaccinated as opposed to those who had previously been infected. I was pointing out that you didn’t clarify who the two groups were. Do you think it would be best to give a jab of the virus to the unvaccinated as they will then have less chance of being reinfected (especially if they are dead)!
You asked "Do you think it would be best to give a jab of the virus to the unvaccinated as they will then have less chance of being reinfected (especially if they are dead)!" Can you clarify what you mean by this?"I was putting that question to you. I thought it was obvious. If you are 6 times less likely to be reinfected once you have had the virus compared to being vaccinated, do you believe it’s best to infect the unvaccinated do that they have less chance of being reinfected at a later time point? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Over 90% of people now have antibodies. Have a look at the link below. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19latestinsights/antibodies We come full circle... I quote “due to previous infection and/or vaccination”. Did you just actually give yourself the SCIENTIFIC DATA to support the roll out of the passport scheme? " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected. "Marv - using BLOCK CAPITALS in all your posts really does persuade me as to the value of those points  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave." Have another read of the articles. You've clearly missed some of the most important bits I think you’re missing the point... the article talks about the prolonged resistance for those who’ve suffered covid compared to those vaccinated. The missing space is both those groups remain far less at risk compared to the unvaccinated who’ve not been infected. Are you actually suggesting we should have another crack at here immunity you toughen us all up? We tested that theory early doors and had to slam the brakes on before we had people dying in the streets. Over 90% of people now have antibodies so there isn't much "missing space" lol" But you’re forgetting your own references now... the actual scientific learning from Israel is that immunity is not a long period for either those infected or indeed those vaccinated... Therefore as with other vaccines their will be a path for further boosters etc... hence, scientifically the need for a passport system showing people’s current risk. I rest my case | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Passport b crap never going to happen. We have individual rights and freedoms." Erm... it’s already happened hun, sorry to break it to you x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do not have a vaccine passport " Fabulous, you won’t be going on holiday or clubbing anytime soon then x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There doesn’t need to be a scientific justification, the government has a huge majority and will do what it wants. You essentially have two options, the first is you get vaccinated so you can go to events, the second is whine on the Internet that you can’t go to events. It’s not fair, it might not even be right but neither of those things matter because reality." a for life passport or a yearly one they will not say. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There doesn’t need to be a scientific justification, the government has a huge majority and will do what it wants. You essentially have two options, the first is you get vaccinated so you can go to events, the second is whine on the Internet that you can’t go to events. It’s not fair, it might not even be right but neither of those things matter because reality. a for life passport or a yearly one they will not say." Again, it doesn’t matter because the country, rightly or wrongly, voted on a bunch of authoritarians who see normal people as beneath them. They will do what they want. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There doesn’t need to be a scientific justification, the government has a huge majority and will do what it wants. You essentially have two options, the first is you get vaccinated so you can go to events, the second is whine on the Internet that you can’t go to events. It’s not fair, it might not even be right but neither of those things matter because reality. a for life passport or a yearly one they will not say." I don't mind keeping up to date on my vaccinations. Why would I? Good for me, good for everyone else around me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Despite ruling them out earlier this year, Nadhim Zahawi confirmed this morning that Covid passport's will the required to enter large venues from October. Given that we now KNOW that the Vaccines don't prevent transmission, what's the SCIENTIFIC basis for this? One a side note, recent data demonstrates that vaccinated people are more likely to catch the disease and transmit the same viral load as unvaccinated people once they do catch it. Have a look at the links below. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9959563/Ministers-confirm-vaccine-passports-required-large-venues.html https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 " Jesus… the one we have learned is that you certainly don’t take in information…. And that you try to force your pov based on very selective and sometimes inaccurate assumptions Since the first assumption you make about the vaccine being preventative is false… I guessing the reason why it is coming in is to try an stop example 5000 covid cases being back linked to a festival in Cornwall | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected. "Exactly. That’s why us unvaccinated shouldn’t go to concerts full of them… eat around them get it now? Corona spike protein shedding means it may not safe to be in contact with them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
Exactly. That’s why us unvaccinated shouldn’t go to concerts full of them… eat around them get it now? Corona spike protein shedding means it may not safe to be in contact with them. "Suits me, please stay home so I can’t endanger you with a non existent issue. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
Exactly. That’s why us unvaccinated shouldn’t go to concerts full of them… eat around them get it now? Corona spike protein shedding means it may not safe to be in contact with them. "If a bit of spike protein frightens you, you're welcome to stay at home while the rest of us get on with life | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well this sounds like a disgusting abuse of power and also rather pointless when one considers that being vaccinated does not stop one from being infected." Well said I so agree! Also the whole thing prioritised over everything else. Just like cancer patients, My best friend who was given a year last October was kept waiting for scans and treatment! But was too late as it had spread. Disgusting it's all about power and control! It doesn't even protect you and god knows what is in the vaccine. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" UK Government Covid Technical Briefing 21, pages 22/23, in the table titled 'Attendance to emergency care and deaths of sequenced and genotyped Delta cases in England by vaccination status (1 February 2021 to 15 August 2021)'. Total unvaccinated cases: 183,133. Total unvaccinated deaths: 390. Total vaccinated cases (all three dosage status): 163,329. Total vaccinated deaths: 783. If you work out the total number of deaths as a percentage of total cases in each group, then the unvaccinated fatality rate is 0.212%. The vaccinated fatality rate is 0.479%." Thanks for the figures. To work out the fatality rate you should probably use the total number of vaccinated or unvaccinated. Against deaths or cases. 2 reasons one the vaccinated group is now much much larger. Obviously the vaccinated group average age is much higher than the unvaccinated so you would expect if the vaccine wasn't working you would expect 95% of deaths to be in the vaccinated group. This is nowhere near the case. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
Exactly. That’s why us unvaccinated shouldn’t go to concerts full of them… eat around them get it now? Corona spike protein shedding means it may not safe to be in contact with them.
If a bit of spike protein frightens you, you're welcome to stay at home while the rest of us get on with life "You like imposing your will on others don't you How about, you leave people choose what to do, and others will leave you choose what to do, and we all leave each other the fuck alone | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do not have a vaccine passport " Nor me as I’m not allowed the jabs | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
Exactly. That’s why us unvaccinated shouldn’t go to concerts full of them… eat around them get it now? Corona spike protein shedding means it may not safe to be in contact with them.
If a bit of spike protein frightens you, you're welcome to stay at home while the rest of us get on with life
You like imposing your will on others don't you
How about, you leave people choose what to do, and others will leave you choose what to do, and we all leave each other the fuck alone"I didn't say "you must". But it's the reality, isn't it? The majority of the adult population are vaccinated. If someone believes that the vaccinated are contagious and pose a threat - we can't unvaccinate people. You have a choice - either live with the "risk" or lock yourself away. It's not my belief, it's not my mandate. It's just the consequences of that belief. You may do as you wish - in accordance with the law. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
Exactly. That’s why us unvaccinated shouldn’t go to concerts full of them… eat around them get it now? Corona spike protein shedding means it may not safe to be in contact with them.
If a bit of spike protein frightens you, you're welcome to stay at home while the rest of us get on with life
You like imposing your will on others don't you
How about, you leave people choose what to do, and others will leave you choose what to do, and we all leave each other the fuck alone"That sounds like a great idea to be fair. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait ". One born every minute! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do not have a vaccine passport Nor me as I’m not allowed the jabs " Those ineligible would typically get the same status benefits. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do not have a vaccine passport Nor me as I’m not allowed the jabs Those ineligible would typically get the same status benefits. " But not get a vaccine passport. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes very stupid healthy young people who took an experimental RNA pseudo vaccine that the CDC admit causes irreparable heart inflammation, we know causes blood clots against a virus with a survival rate of better then 99%, the lemmings." So are we saying the CDC are a reliable source now? Because if they are in there weekly mortality report they noted that those people unvaccinated were 5 times more than someone who had been double jabbed to catch covid…… and 29 times more likely to be hospitalised…. So remind me again…… just who are the lemmings | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
Exactly. That’s why us unvaccinated shouldn’t go to concerts full of them… eat around them get it now? Corona spike protein shedding means it may not safe to be in contact with them.
If a bit of spike protein frightens you, you're welcome to stay at home while the rest of us get on with life "The irony in this post is off the charts. Given a negative test would completely suffice, and not sideline anyone in society, the government proposal is abhorrent. Segregation is not okay. In fact, it’s vile. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes very stupid healthy young people who took an experimental RNA pseudo vaccine that the CDC admit causes irreparable heart inflammation, we know causes blood clots against a virus with a survival rate of better then 99%, the lemmings. So are we saying the CDC are a reliable source now? Because if they are in there weekly mortality report they noted that those people unvaccinated were 5 times more than someone who had been double jabbed to catch covid…… and 29 times more likely to be hospitalised…. So remind me again…… just who are the lemmings "The ones who took the experimental… just read the post again. The CDC count deaths within 14 days of vaccination as unvaccinated so those number include any vaccine caused fatalities. …for a virus with a 99% survival rate. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes very stupid healthy young people who took an experimental RNA pseudo vaccine that the CDC admit causes irreparable heart inflammation, we know causes blood clots against a virus with a survival rate of better then 99%, the lemmings. So are we saying the CDC are a reliable source now? Because if they are in there weekly mortality report they noted that those people unvaccinated were 5 times more than someone who had been double jabbed to catch covid…… and 29 times more likely to be hospitalised…. So remind me again…… just who are the lemmings
The ones who took the experimental… just read the post again.
The CDC count deaths within 14 days of vaccination as unvaccinated so those number include any vaccine caused fatalities.
…for a virus with a 99% survival rate. "The CDC said that the vaccines can cause heart damage and can cause clots, because like every other medication and vaccine they have side effects. Like all things people weigh up the pros and cons. I realise you think that being someone who chose not to get vaccinated makes you feel like you are some kind of lone freedom fighter who knows better than doctors and scientists But if we look at this from a statistical point of view you are far more likely to be the guy who has allowed themselves to be influenced by a Karen on Facebook and some dodgy YouTube videos. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes very stupid healthy young people who took an experimental RNA pseudo vaccine that the CDC admit causes irreparable heart inflammation, we know causes blood clots against a virus with a survival rate of better then 99%, the lemmings." did they mention the percentage that causes clots etc? That's the key part to measure the relative risks ... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
Exactly. That’s why us unvaccinated shouldn’t go to concerts full of them… eat around them get it now? Corona spike protein shedding means it may not safe to be in contact with them.
If a bit of spike protein frightens you, you're welcome to stay at home while the rest of us get on with life
The irony in this post is off the charts.
Given a negative test would completely suffice, and not sideline anyone in society, the government proposal is abhorrent. Segregation is not okay. In fact, it’s vile."I'm glad you recognise the irony. Remember last year? The cries to open up. 'If you're vulnerable or scared you can stay at home, cower behind the sofa, wet yourself, while the rest of us get on with life?' I do. If you think the vaccinated are contagious and will hurt the pure bodies of the unvaccinated - best to avoid them. And given we're the vast majority - it's safest at home. Exercise personal responsibility to protect yourself from the dangers of the shed spike protein. You cannot save the majority. It's too late. We've been good little sheeple and been vaccinated. We are unclean. But you can save yourself  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
Exactly. That’s why us unvaccinated shouldn’t go to concerts full of them… eat around them get it now? Corona spike protein shedding means it may not safe to be in contact with them.
If a bit of spike protein frightens you, you're welcome to stay at home while the rest of us get on with life
The irony in this post is off the charts.
Given a negative test would completely suffice, and not sideline anyone in society, the government proposal is abhorrent. Segregation is not okay. In fact, it’s vile.
I'm glad you recognise the irony.
Remember last year? The cries to open up. 'If you're vulnerable or scared you can stay at home, cower behind the sofa, wet yourself, while the rest of us get on with life?' I do.
If you think the vaccinated are contagious and will hurt the pure bodies of the unvaccinated - best to avoid them. And given we're the vast majority - it's safest at home.
Exercise personal responsibility to protect yourself from the dangers of the shed spike protein. You cannot save the majority. It's too late. We've been good little sheeple and been vaccinated. We are unclean. But you can save yourself "The irony is that those who don’t want the vaccine have not been the ones hiding at home. You have said yourself you have been very wary of going out! Hilarious! I fully expect to get covid and have not stayed in or stopped seeing people at all, life is for living, not hiding away scared. Have the vaccine if you want. Don’t have it if you don’t want. Segregating society is vile and no attempted justification can ever make it ok. We’re really seeing who the fascists are now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
Exactly. That’s why us unvaccinated shouldn’t go to concerts full of them… eat around them get it now? Corona spike protein shedding means it may not safe to be in contact with them.
If a bit of spike protein frightens you, you're welcome to stay at home while the rest of us get on with life
The irony in this post is off the charts.
Given a negative test would completely suffice, and not sideline anyone in society, the government proposal is abhorrent. Segregation is not okay. In fact, it’s vile.
I'm glad you recognise the irony.
Remember last year? The cries to open up. 'If you're vulnerable or scared you can stay at home, cower behind the sofa, wet yourself, while the rest of us get on with life?' I do.
If you think the vaccinated are contagious and will hurt the pure bodies of the unvaccinated - best to avoid them. And given we're the vast majority - it's safest at home.
Exercise personal responsibility to protect yourself from the dangers of the shed spike protein. You cannot save the majority. It's too late. We've been good little sheeple and been vaccinated. We are unclean. But you can save yourself
The irony is that those who don’t want the vaccine have not been the ones hiding at home. You have said yourself you have been very wary of going out! Hilarious! I fully expect to get covid and have not stayed in or stopped seeing people at all, life is for living, not hiding away scared.
Have the vaccine if you want. Don’t have it if you don’t want. Segregating society is vile and no attempted justification can ever make it ok. We’re really seeing who the fascists are now."It used to be "stay at home to protect the vulnerable", then it turned into "get a vaccine to protect the vulnerable" now after the vulnerable all vaccinated its back to "stay at home to protect the vulnerable". Me working my ass off and paying through my nose in taxes and national insurance is good enough for the vulnerable. Me wanting to go to a gig suddenly puts the vulnerable in some lethal danger..
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
Exactly. That’s why us unvaccinated shouldn’t go to concerts full of them… eat around them get it now? Corona spike protein shedding means it may not safe to be in contact with them.
If a bit of spike protein frightens you, you're welcome to stay at home while the rest of us get on with life
The irony in this post is off the charts.
Given a negative test would completely suffice, and not sideline anyone in society, the government proposal is abhorrent. Segregation is not okay. In fact, it’s vile.
I'm glad you recognise the irony.
Remember last year? The cries to open up. 'If you're vulnerable or scared you can stay at home, cower behind the sofa, wet yourself, while the rest of us get on with life?' I do.
If you think the vaccinated are contagious and will hurt the pure bodies of the unvaccinated - best to avoid them. And given we're the vast majority - it's safest at home.
Exercise personal responsibility to protect yourself from the dangers of the shed spike protein. You cannot save the majority. It's too late. We've been good little sheeple and been vaccinated. We are unclean. But you can save yourself
The irony is that those who don’t want the vaccine have not been the ones hiding at home. You have said yourself you have been very wary of going out! Hilarious! I fully expect to get covid and have not stayed in or stopped seeing people at all, life is for living, not hiding away scared.
Have the vaccine if you want. Don’t have it if you don’t want. Segregating society is vile and no attempted justification can ever make it ok. We’re really seeing who the fascists are now."So people who are scared of being contaminated by the vaccinated should just get over it and get on with life? Because that's what I'm responding to. Some people believe that the vaccinated are a threat to them. If they do believe this - not that I think the argument has any evidence supporting it - then they'd better avoid the vaccinated. I'm hardly telling anyone what to do. I'm exploring the consequences of a belief. If you believe I'm going to infect you with my vaccination, then you might be better off avoiding me. Please explain how exploring the consequences of a belief is fascism? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Since I found out about covid spike protein shedding, antibody dependent enhancement and sytokine storm, I’ve changed my mind about it all. It’s safer if the unvaccinated keep themselves to themselves for while at least. It’s only fair the jabbed get to enjoy things. The rest of can wait
What's the SCIENTIFIC basis for that view? Data shows that vaccinated people are 6 times more likely to be infected and just as likely to spread it once they are infected.
Exactly. That’s why us unvaccinated shouldn’t go to concerts full of them… eat around them get it now? Corona spike protein shedding means it may not safe to be in contact with them.
If a bit of spike protein frightens you, you're welcome to stay at home while the rest of us get on with life
The irony in this post is off the charts.
Given a negative test would completely suffice, and not sideline anyone in society, the government proposal is abhorrent. Segregation is not okay. In fact, it’s vile.
I'm glad you recognise the irony.
Remember last year? The cries to open up. 'If you're vulnerable or scared you can stay at home, cower behind the sofa, wet yourself, while the rest of us get on with life?' I do.
If you think the vaccinated are contagious and will hurt the pure bodies of the unvaccinated - best to avoid them. And given we're the vast majority - it's safest at home.
Exercise personal responsibility to protect yourself from the dangers of the shed spike protein. You cannot save the majority. It's too late. We've been good little sheeple and been vaccinated. We are unclean. But you can save yourself
The irony is that those who don’t want the vaccine have not been the ones hiding at home. You have said yourself you have been very wary of going out! Hilarious! I fully expect to get covid and have not stayed in or stopped seeing people at all, life is for living, not hiding away scared.
Have the vaccine if you want. Don’t have it if you don’t want. Segregating society is vile and no attempted justification can ever make it ok. We’re really seeing who the fascists are now.
So people who are scared of being contaminated by the vaccinated should just get over it and get on with life?
Because that's what I'm responding to. Some people believe that the vaccinated are a threat to them. If they do believe this - not that I think the argument has any evidence supporting it - then they'd better avoid the vaccinated.
I'm hardly telling anyone what to do. I'm exploring the consequences of a belief. If you believe I'm going to infect you with my vaccination, then you might be better off avoiding me.
Please explain how exploring the consequences of a belief is fascism?"I dont believe anyone is particularly more likely to infect me than anyone else. I fully expect to get covid at some point. The fascism is accepting segregation through passports. If passports had an alternative of a negative test no one is segregated. The proposal does not include that, and it’s gross. Those who support this support medical segregation. They are the fascists. That wasn’t aimed at you in particular. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The focus really ought to be on people's covid status not their vaccine status. Research shows that with the prevalent delta variant vaccinated people carry a similar viral load to unvaccinated people. I am personally double vaccinated but I refuse to do anything that a covid clear unvaccinated person is not free to do. " Respect to you, totally agree. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Research shows that with the prevalent delta variant vaccinated people carry a similar viral load to unvaccinated people" Viral load does not equate in any way to how infectious you are (or aren't) though. For example several recent research papers (eg UCLA) show that someone who has had Covid can have a very high viral load for several weeks after infection but will only be infectious for the first 9 days hence the 10 day isolation period. Research (eg the ZOE study) shows that being vaccinated reduces significantly the likelihood of passing on the virus. Common sense should prevail in that if you have any symptoms, even mild cold like symptoms, you should stay at home and/or get a test. My own recent experiences suggest that a PCR test would be much better than a LFT as those don't seem to show positive unless you have heavy symptoms - Two vaccinated people I've known recently tested positive with PCR, had no symptoms at all, tested every single day of isolation with LFT but not once got a positive. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://youtu.be/6v5VrpgXPm4 Natural Immunity offer 13 times more protection according to this study. Why do we need passports when 90% of us know have antibodies? " I did not know that 90% of us have enough antibodies. With this sweeping statement I feel a lot calmer now! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Both vaccinated so happy for a covid passport system to be put into place Yes vaccinated and unvaccinated can still catch or transmit the virus but vaccinated are less likely to have serious side effects This is obvious as most of the UK is fully open and most people are vaccinated and death toll and hospital admissions are no where near where they were before the vaccine roll out No one could predict the length of protection that the vaccine offered and it was always mentioned that a booster may be needed The virus mutates so must the vaccines to combat this We all had choices to take the vaccine or not so if you didn't that's your choice the governments first priority was to pretect the vunerable and the NHS if this means limiting unvaccinated people's movements then so be it Greece are already giving third doses and pubs restraunts have no jab no entry rules Let us ones who took the vaccine enjoy life we made the choice to take it so why should we be restricted along with the unvaccinated when we are lower risk " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
I’d rather see negative tests in the last 24hrs before entering a huge social gathering like a festival and r gig.
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think that we can safely assume the OP is a bot, given that all it does is repeat slight variations on about three sentences continuously. OP, on the slight chance that you are a real person, you clearly have no concept of what actual science might be. All those doubtful about the government, yes you're probably right, the current shower do just make it up randomly as they go along. However, this does mean that about half the time they accidentally end up doing something like the right thing, even if it is generally organised in some fucked up way intended mainly to funnel money into their brother-in-laws pockets. It will be interesting to look back on this in about 20 years time, when the covid plague will be used as an example of Darwinian pressure in evolution, showing how average intelligence rose sharply because of the higher death rate amongst covid and vaccine deniers." Average intelligence rose sharply? Really? See the thread on “division” and have a word with yourself. Segregating society is not an example of intelligence. There’s a few other words I can think of though… | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think that we can safely assume the OP is a bot, given that all it does is repeat slight variations on about three sentences continuously. OP, on the slight chance that you are a real person, you clearly have no concept of what actual science might be. All those doubtful about the government, yes you're probably right, the current shower do just make it up randomly as they go along. However, this does mean that about half the time they accidentally end up doing something like the right thing, even if it is generally organised in some fucked up way intended mainly to funnel money into their brother-in-laws pockets. It will be interesting to look back on this in about 20 years time, when the covid plague will be used as an example of Darwinian pressure in evolution, showing how average intelligence rose sharply because of the higher death rate amongst covid and vaccine deniers." I am indeed a real person. I also think that we should be able to have a debate without insulting each other. Personally, I'm here to learn and to ask questions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Does yours not work until we’ve all had ours? Why stop there? Why not ban anyone without a flu jab. Or ban anyone HIV positive? Someone who didn’t get their MMR and polio shots maybe? The deaths in the U.K. last week, were higher than this time last year. Funny that, given over 70% are jabbed. Israel’s cases are through the roof with over 80% “jabbed”. You’re 7500 times more likely to die in a car crash than you are of covid if you’re under 60. Maybe we should ban all cars just in case. But I guess it’s better if we were all put into camps and denied freedom so you don’t have to risk that 0.06% fatality rate. Don’t forget to have your endless injections of boosters for the rest of your life. 99% survival rate just isn’t worth the risk is it? You’re attitudes are no different to the the people who put Jews on trains. Or had “WHITES ONLY” signs on their business. Besides, everyone knows the only reason the majority of you fucktards took it, was nothing to do with your health. It was to go on holiday and “GeT YoUr FrEeDoMs BaCk”" “ You’re attitudes are no different to the the people who put Jews on trains”….. pity there wasn’t a vaccine for hyperbole | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Does yours not work until we’ve all had ours? Why stop there? Why not ban anyone without a flu jab. Or ban anyone HIV positive? Someone who didn’t get their MMR and polio shots maybe? The deaths in the U.K. last week, were higher than this time last year. Funny that, given over 70% are jabbed. Israel’s cases are through the roof with over 80% “jabbed”. You’re 7500 times more likely to die in a car crash than you are of covid if you’re under 60. Maybe we should ban all cars just in case. But I guess it’s better if we were all put into camps and denied freedom so you don’t have to risk that 0.06% fatality rate. Don’t forget to have your endless injections of boosters for the rest of your life. 99% survival rate just isn’t worth the risk is it? You’re attitudes are no different to the the people who put Jews on trains. Or had “WHITES ONLY” signs on their business. Besides, everyone knows the only reason the majority of you fucktards took it, was nothing to do with your health. It was to go on holiday and “GeT YoUr FrEeDoMs BaCk”" You’re seriously equating people who want everyone protect Ted from a lethal virus to Nazis? You need to take a long hard look at yourself and step away from the Internet. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Does yours not work until we’ve all had ours? Why stop there? Why not ban anyone without a flu jab. Or ban anyone HIV positive? Someone who didn’t get their MMR and polio shots maybe? The deaths in the U.K. last week, were higher than this time last year. Funny that, given over 70% are jabbed. Israel’s cases are through the roof with over 80% “jabbed”. You’re 7500 times more likely to die in a car crash than you are of covid if you’re under 60. Maybe we should ban all cars just in case. But I guess it’s better if we were all put into camps and denied freedom so you don’t have to risk that 0.06% fatality rate. Don’t forget to have your endless injections of boosters for the rest of your life. 99% survival rate just isn’t worth the risk is it? You’re attitudes are no different to the the people who put Jews on trains. Or had “WHITES ONLY” signs on their business. Besides, everyone knows the only reason the majority of you fucktards took it, was nothing to do with your health. It was to go on holiday and “GeT YoUr FrEeDoMs BaCk” You’re seriously equating people who want everyone protect Ted from a lethal virus to Nazis? You need to take a long hard look at yourself and step away from the Internet." They didn’t gas the Jews on the first day you know. This is how it starts. But don’t worry though, you’ll be fine because you’ll have your passport  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Despite ruling them out earlier this year, Nadhim Zahawi confirmed this morning that Covid passport's will the required to enter large venues from October. Given that we now KNOW that the Vaccines don't prevent transmission, what's the SCIENTIFIC basis for this? One a side note, recent data demonstrates that vaccinated people are more likely to catch the disease and transmit the same viral load as unvaccinated people once they do catch it. Have a look at the links below. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9959563/Ministers-confirm-vaccine-passports-required-large-venues.html https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/309762 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-covid-prevents-delta-infection-better-than-pfizer-shot https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-study-idUSKBN2FJ2C1 " Check the daily deaths vs infection in worldometers and you're in for a surprise if you think the vaccine downst work | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Does yours not work until we’ve all had ours? Why stop there? Why not ban anyone without a flu jab. Or ban anyone HIV positive? Someone who didn’t get their MMR and polio shots maybe? The deaths in the U.K. last week, were higher than this time last year. Funny that, given over 70% are jabbed. Israel’s cases are through the roof with over 80% “jabbed”. You’re 7500 times more likely to die in a car crash than you are of covid if you’re under 60. Maybe we should ban all cars just in case. But I guess it’s better if we were all put into camps and denied freedom so you don’t have to risk that 0.06% fatality rate. Don’t forget to have your endless injections of boosters for the rest of your life. 99% survival rate just isn’t worth the risk is it? You’re attitudes are no different to the the people who put Jews on trains. Or had “WHITES ONLY” signs on their business. Besides, everyone knows the only reason the majority of you fucktards took it, was nothing to do with your health. It was to go on holiday and “GeT YoUr FrEeDoMs BaCk” You’re seriously equating people who want everyone protect Ted from a lethal virus to Nazis? You need to take a long hard look at yourself and step away from the Internet. They didn’t gas the Jews on the first day you know. This is how it starts. But don’t worry though, you’ll be fine because you’ll have your passport "If you're that worried, we would never make any progress with anything, even if there are solid protections. I'm assuming that you have done everything to protect others since the start of 2020, without fail? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Does yours not work until we’ve all had ours? Why stop there? Why not ban anyone without a flu jab. Or ban anyone HIV positive? Someone who didn’t get their MMR and polio shots maybe? The deaths in the U.K. last week, were higher than this time last year. Funny that, given over 70% are jabbed. Israel’s cases are through the roof with over 80% “jabbed”. You’re 7500 times more likely to die in a car crash than you are of covid if you’re under 60. Maybe we should ban all cars just in case. But I guess it’s better if we were all put into camps and denied freedom so you don’t have to risk that 0.06% fatality rate. Don’t forget to have your endless injections of boosters for the rest of your life. 99% survival rate just isn’t worth the risk is it? You’re attitudes are no different to the the people who put Jews on trains. Or had “WHITES ONLY” signs on their business. Besides, everyone knows the only reason the majority of you fucktards took it, was nothing to do with your health. It was to go on holiday and “GeT YoUr FrEeDoMs BaCk” You’re seriously equating people who want everyone protect Ted from a lethal virus to Nazis? You need to take a long hard look at yourself and step away from the Internet. They didn’t gas the Jews on the first day you know. This is how it starts. But don’t worry though, you’ll be fine because you’ll have your passport "Interesting parallelism. Through their perversion, goals and ideology, the Nazis targeted this specific group of people. Who is the target now and for what? What do you think is the ultimate goal and every government in the world acts to wipe out the majority of their population by enforcing the vaccine? Do you have a realistic scenario in your mind of how the world will be in 10-15 years from now with most of us already victims of this global mass vaccination drive? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Does yours not work until we’ve all had ours? Why stop there? Why not ban anyone without a flu jab. Or ban anyone HIV positive? Someone who didn’t get their MMR and polio shots maybe? The deaths in the U.K. last week, were higher than this time last year. Funny that, given over 70% are jabbed. Israel’s cases are through the roof with over 80% “jabbed”. You’re 7500 times more likely to die in a car crash than you are of covid if you’re under 60. Maybe we should ban all cars just in case. But I guess it’s better if we were all put into camps and denied freedom so you don’t have to risk that 0.06% fatality rate. Don’t forget to have your endless injections of boosters for the rest of your life. 99% survival rate just isn’t worth the risk is it? You’re attitudes are no different to the the people who put Jews on trains. Or had “WHITES ONLY” signs on their business. Besides, everyone knows the only reason the majority of you fucktards took it, was nothing to do with your health. It was to go on holiday and “GeT YoUr FrEeDoMs BaCk” You’re seriously equating people who want everyone protect Ted from a lethal virus to Nazis? You need to take a long hard look at yourself and step away from the Internet. They didn’t gas the Jews on the first day you know. This is how it starts. But don’t worry though, you’ll be fine because you’ll have your passport
If you're that worried, we would never make any progress with anything, even if there are solid protections. I'm assuming that you have done everything to protect others since the start of 2020, without fail? "Have you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Does yours not work until we’ve all had ours? Why stop there? Why not ban anyone without a flu jab. Or ban anyone HIV positive? Someone who didn’t get their MMR and polio shots maybe? The deaths in the U.K. last week, were higher than this time last year. Funny that, given over 70% are jabbed. Israel’s cases are through the roof with over 80% “jabbed”. You’re 7500 times more likely to die in a car crash than you are of covid if you’re under 60. Maybe we should ban all cars just in case. But I guess it’s better if we were all put into camps and denied freedom so you don’t have to risk that 0.06% fatality rate. Don’t forget to have your endless injections of boosters for the rest of your life. 99% survival rate just isn’t worth the risk is it? You’re attitudes are no different to the the people who put Jews on trains. Or had “WHITES ONLY” signs on their business. Besides, everyone knows the only reason the majority of you fucktards took it, was nothing to do with your health. It was to go on holiday and “GeT YoUr FrEeDoMs BaCk” You’re seriously equating people who want everyone protect Ted from a lethal virus to Nazis? You need to take a long hard look at yourself and step away from the Internet. They didn’t gas the Jews on the first day you know. This is how it starts. But don’t worry though, you’ll be fine because you’ll have your passport
Interesting parallelism.
Through their perversion, goals and ideology, the Nazis targeted this specific group of people.
Who is the target now and for what? What do you think is the ultimate goal and every government in the world acts to wipe out the majority of their population by enforcing the vaccine?
Do you have a realistic scenario in your mind of how the world will be in 10-15 years from now with most of us already victims of this global mass vaccination drive?
"10-15 years from now? Who really knows? Unvaccinated completely cut off from society until they all die out while the rest of the population are entirely dependent on the government for survival? Thunderdome? Either way, I won’t be asking to hide under your floorboards. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All about Control.......coming soon........Digital ID (funded by Bill Gates and Rockefeller Foundation) Google WHO Digital Documentation Covid 19 " This, it is the covid narrative. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All about Control.......coming soon........Digital ID (funded by Bill Gates and Rockefeller Foundation) Google WHO Digital Documentation Covid 19 This, it is the covid narrative." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
