FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Vaccinated vs unvaccinated
Vaccinated vs unvaccinated
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) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. There is no conclusive information. There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating "Less chance of becoming seriously ill by having a vaccine, there are no guarantees in this life!! Except that we will all die one day | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. There is no conclusive information. There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
Less chance of becoming seriously ill by having a vaccine, there are no guarantees in this life!!
Except that we will all die one day "Less chance? Risk of developing myocarditis the day after having 1st pfizer vaccination (as happend to a familly member) and confirmed by hospital staff when he had chest pains and went in for a checkup. Age 32. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. There is no conclusive information. There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
Less chance of becoming seriously ill by having a vaccine, there are no guarantees in this life!!
Except that we will all die one day
Less chance?
Risk of developing myocarditis the day after having 1st pfizer vaccination (as happend to a familly member) and confirmed by hospital staff when he had chest pains and went in for a checkup. Age 32."It happens! I developed an irregular heartbeat not covid or even vaccine related. Who knew that could just happen ? No early health issues always kept reasonably fit eat reasonably healthy but still happened. Short circuit who knew ?  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. There is no conclusive information. There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating "A is not a gambler. B likes to have a wee flutter. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. " That is true…the vaccines purpose is to mitigate the severity of the illness you get . Although there is a greater likelihood of B ending up in hospital than A (roughly around 6 times greater)… Okay… so let’s continue "There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa." Actually this is not true…. Research shows that if both get covid, again B spreads covid at a 6 times greater rate than A….. "A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information." Actually in your example OP, person B chose not to act based on information that you gave that was incorrect… but let’s go on…. " There is no conclusive information. " There is conclusive information… there is research and there is continuing research to give the information we get better and better… whether people understand or believe that information is a separate topic… So again…. Let’s continue " There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating "Because misinforming people is a great way to get yourself noticed and stand out for all the right reasons……. And a merry Christmas to you!!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die." Person C has to forego that hip replacement because person B is taking up the ICU bed that may be needed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die. Person C has to forego that hip replacement because person B is taking up the ICU bed that may be needed." Actually B is 11 times more likely to need ICU care or die….. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. There is no conclusive information. There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating "Um that’s a total misrepresentation of the facts though isn’t it. Total fiction almost. Person A has a 90% chance of not contracting the virus Person B has A 90% chance of catching the virus Person A may pass it on, but they wont get I’ll Person B may pass it on and be I’ll Person A has only a 2% chance of being hospitalised if they do get I’ll Person B has a 15% chance of being hospitalised if they get ill If hospitalised, person A has a 94% chance of survival. If hospitalised Person B has a 33% chance of death | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
   | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I hate autocorrect for changing “ill” to I’ll for my whole message "I don’t recognise your stats but get the sentiment except... “Person A has a 90% chance of not contracting the virus Person B has A 90% chance of catching the virus” Is completely wrong! The vaccine does not stop you catching Covid. THAT is why our infection numbers are so high when we also have such a high level of vaccination! The vaccine significantly reduces the chance of developing serious symptoms/complications when you catch Covid. There is no evidence I am aware of around an increased/decreased possibility of catching Covid for vaccinated vs unvaccinated. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. That is true…the vaccines purpose is to mitigate the severity of the illness you get . Although there is a greater likelihood of B ending up in hospital than A (roughly around 6 times greater)… Okay… so let’s continue There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. Actually this is not true…. Research shows that if both get covid, again B spreads covid at a 6 times greater rate than A….. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. Actually in your example OP, person B chose not to act based on information that you gave that was incorrect… but let’s go on…. There is no conclusive information. There is conclusive information… there is research and there is continuing research to give the information we get better and better… whether people understand or believe that information is a separate topic… So again…. Let’s continue There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
Because misinforming people is a great way to get yourself noticed and stand out for all the right reasons……. And a merry Christmas to you!!!"Interesting stats. Can you cite your source as would like to dig into those. Also on a specific point... “There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. Actually this is not true…. Research shows that if both get covid, again B spreads covid at a 6 times greater rate than A…..” Spreading is not the same as a chance of getting infected but...so you are saying unvaccinated people spread at a rate 6 times higher than unvaccinated. Really? I really want to see the source for that assertion. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die." If person A is “extremely unlikely” to need ICU and person B is only 5 times as likely to need ICU doesn’t that mean it’s still unlikely they’ll need the ICU? I understand what’s being said here but there’s a lot of unnecessary hysteria over the risk posed to unvaccinated people. There are also lot more factors to consider than just vaccination status. For instance, who is more at risk of needing ICU; an overweight, diabetic, 65 year old who is vaccinated, or a fit, 30 year old with no health issues who isn’t vaccinated? I feel like this isn’t as black and white as people are making out. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die. If person A is “extremely unlikely” to need ICU and person B is only 5 times as likely to need ICU doesn’t that mean it’s still unlikely they’ll need the ICU? I understand what’s being said here but there’s a lot of unnecessary hysteria over the risk posed to unvaccinated people. There are also lot more factors to consider than just vaccination status. For instance, who is more at risk of needing ICU; an overweight, diabetic, 65 year old who is vaccinated, or a fit, 30 year old with no health issues who isn’t vaccinated? I feel like this isn’t as black and white as people are making out. " I hope people understand that there are more factors .... However when it gets to implementing an approach, you need simple rules. Mandatory passports for over 65s say is easy to apply. Mandatory vacciens for obese ppl ... What is obese ? How do we police ? Etc. The pieces of the puzzle I'd like more understanding on is 1) does vaccination status change the likelihood of transmission (all other things being equal) 2) does it change the likelihood in practice overlaying behaviours and 3) does being vaccinated reduce mutation risks. I think these areas are where an individual's choice affects the wider group and also where I dont think one can argue away "I'm low risk". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If person A and person B keep away from each other then we should all be safe. Or am I getting confused by all the bollocks spouted on here." Yes , in away that is right as there are potentially shedding going on from person a to person b. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die. Person C has to forego that hip replacement because person B is taking up the ICU bed that may be needed. Actually B is 11 times more likely to need ICU care or die….." If there is an available high-dependency bed, and the highly-trained staff to attend. As found with the Nightingale hospitals: Beds are easy, staff are not there..... Many people were triaged direct to palliative care. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"That is true…the vaccines purpose is to mitigate the severity of the illness you get . Although there is a greater likelihood of B ending up in hospital than A (roughly around 6 times greater)… " I based that on the fact that both A and B are currently becoming ill, and with a new player entering the game we have no idea where things are heading. _________ There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. "Actually this is not true…. Research shows that if both get covid, again B spreads covid at a 6 times greater rate than A… " So there's more chance of unvaccinated catching and spreading Covid? That was the point of what I said. Minus the statistics. _________ A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. "Actually in your example OP, person B chose not to act based on information that you gave that was incorrect… " The point you missed here is that they'd both be correct for making their own minds up based on their perception of medical/media/government advice. You seem to think I'm one side of the fence or the other. There's no fence, there's choice and I haven't given any information or advice. At this point at least. "but let’s go on…" If we must. _________ There is no conclusive information. "There is conclusive information… there is research and there is continuing research to give the information we get better and better… whether people understand or believe that information is a separate topic… " There's no conclusive information when a situation is ongoing, only speculation based on research, and yes, of course there's valuable research going on and there's also an evolving virus chasing the research while it's also running away from it. We're likely (medical opinion, not my own) looking at a flu-like cat and mouse chase. Who knows. Hence "no conclusive information"
"So again…. Let’s continue " Oh, go on then. _________ There. Hope that clears things up and [INFORMATION AND ADVICE ALERT] we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
"Because misinforming people is a great way to get yourself noticed and stand out for all the right reasons……. " Ummm, no. It was more because this is a sex contact site rather than a place for medical advice. Wouldn't misinforming people more likely get you noticed and stand out for all the wrong reasons? Probably six times more likely
"And a merry Christmas to you!!!" I'm Muslim. Just kidding, Happy Christmas mate  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If person A and person B keep away from each other then we should all be safe. Or am I getting confused by all the bollocks spouted on here."  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting stats. Can you cite your source as would like to dig into those. Also on a specific point... “There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. Actually this is not true…. Research shows that if both get covid, again B spreads covid at a 6 times greater rate than A…..” Spreading is not the same as a chance of getting infected but...so you are saying unvaccinated people spread at a rate 6 times higher than unvaccinated. Really? I really want to see the source for that assertion." _________ I'd be interested in knowing where all the statistics on this thread came from (not just that specific quite from that specific post) given the very fluid and shifting situation we're in. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die. Person C has to forego that hip replacement because person B is taking up the ICU bed that may be needed." Absolutely spot on! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What do pro vaccinated and anti vaxers have in common ? They'll never be fully vaccinated " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die. Person C has to forego that hip replacement because person B is taking up the ICU bed that may be needed." And Person D a life time chain smoker is taking up 1000’s of beds and not a word said about it… oh that’s right… their cigarettes are heavily taxed so the Government is happy enough… praying that you wake out of your sleeping state urgently ! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die. Person C has to forego that hip replacement because person B is taking up the ICU bed that may be needed. And Person D a life time chain smoker is taking up 1000’s of beds and not a word said about it… oh that’s right… their cigarettes are heavily taxed so the Government is happy enough… praying that you wake out of your sleeping state urgently ! " Probably because the illness Person D has isn't contagious *shrug* xx | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die. Person C has to forego that hip replacement because person B is taking up the ICU bed that may be needed. And Person D a life time chain smoker is taking up 1000’s of beds and not a word said about it… oh that’s right… their cigarettes are heavily taxed so the Government is happy enough… praying that you wake out of your sleeping state urgently ! " No need to worry , if the government follows in the footsteps of Austria and others,they will be introducing a “health tax” on person B | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Doesn't seem like that on Ireland. In the pass couple of weeks have been dying around 40to 50 people a week. 98% vaccinated and is all in the hse data. Dont get your booster, is not worth it as they're not even leaving hospitality open after January with 94% vaccinated. Of that is working then I rather taking the chances. Go to your local protests as this is more about control and stabilising comunism than health " Is communism a big thing in the republic of ireland? As far I am aware Marx never mentioned vaccination in Das Kapital. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die." You've missed out making poor old (and innocent, unless they're also vaxxed) person C. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. There is no conclusive information. There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
Less chance of becoming seriously ill by having a vaccine, there are no guarantees in this life!!
Except that we will all die one day
Less chance?
Risk of developing myocarditis the day after having 1st pfizer vaccination (as happend to a familly member) and confirmed by hospital staff when he had chest pains and went in for a checkup. Age 32.
It happens! I developed an irregular heartbeat not covid or even vaccine related.
Who knew that could just happen ? No early health issues always kept reasonably fit eat reasonably healthy but still happened.
Short circuit who knew ? "Great point. Imagine if someone had been ran over on the way to an inoculation appointment. Some would blame it on the vaccine lol. Seriously though , life is a risk then you die. We all do. Personally I prefer a million to one risk against a thousand to one.tens of thousands have been saved by vaccines , sadly many. Many less have had problems. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Doesn't seem like that on Ireland. In the pass couple of weeks have been dying around 40to 50 people a week. 98% vaccinated and is all in the hse data. Dont get your booster, is not worth it as they're not even leaving hospitality open after January with 94% vaccinated. Of that is working then I rather taking the chances. Go to your local protests as this is more about control and stabilising comunism than health " the weekly rate today was the daily rate in Feb. Given cases are getting to the same level as Feb what has changed ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 but it's entertaining all the scientists we have on the site with these mental figures.....,proper stats don't lie.....check your age group.....check how many deaths at your age group compared to how many have had it.....BOOM there's your facts.....at my age and health I've got more chance of dying by a shark attack.but not everyone is in the same position | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So much misinformation on both sides here but it's entertaining all the scientists we have on the site with these mental figures.....,proper stats don't lie.....check your age group.....check how many deaths at your age group compared to how many have had it.....BOOM there's your facts.....at my age and health I've got more chance of dying by a shark attack.but not everyone is in the same position "If you want real figures your chance of dying of a shark in nil in uk, 1 in 5 million in the US. Your chance of dying of covid in the uk so far in your age range is 100 in a million. Obviously the chance of hospitalisation is many times higher than that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So much misinformation on both sides here but it's entertaining all the scientists we have on the site with these mental figures.....,proper stats don't lie.....check your age group.....check how many deaths at your age group compared to how many have had it.....BOOM there's your facts.....at my age and health I've got more chance of dying by a shark attack.but not everyone is in the same position "It’s not just about the risk an individual dying if they catch it and it’s not all about the individual, there’s numerous reasons why people are being asked to get vaccinated. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Doesn't seem like that on Ireland. In the pass couple of weeks have been dying around 40to 50 people a week. 98% vaccinated and is all in the hse data. Dont get your booster, is not worth it as they're not even leaving hospitality open after January with 94% vaccinated. Of that is working then I rather taking the chances. Go to your local protests as this is more about control and stabilising comunism than health " Total rubbish but carry on  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. There is no conclusive information. There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
Less chance of becoming seriously ill by having a vaccine, there are no guarantees in this life!!
Except that we will all die one day
Less chance?
Risk of developing myocarditis the day after having 1st pfizer vaccination (as happend to a familly member) and confirmed by hospital staff when he had chest pains and went in for a checkup. Age 32.
It happens! I developed an irregular heartbeat not covid or even vaccine related.
Who knew that could just happen ? No early health issues always kept reasonably fit eat reasonably healthy but still happened.
Short circuit who knew ? "What straight after a vaccine that is known to cause a heart problem? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. That is true…the vaccines purpose is to mitigate the severity of the illness you get . Although there is a greater likelihood of B ending up in hospital than A (roughly around 6 times greater)… Okay… so let’s continue There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. Actually this is not true…. Research shows that if both get covid, again B spreads covid at a 6 times greater rate than A….. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. Actually in your example OP, person B chose not to act based on information that you gave that was incorrect… but let’s go on…. There is no conclusive information. There is conclusive information… there is research and there is continuing research to give the information we get better and better… whether people understand or believe that information is a separate topic… So again…. Let’s continue There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
Because misinforming people is a great way to get yourself noticed and stand out for all the right reasons……. And a merry Christmas to you!!!"That's not true, JCVI commented recently in their reasoning to not recommend vaccinations for children as being because vaccinated gain a larger viral load when infected than unvaxed and therefore transmit at 2-3 times higher rate. Also currently ONS data shows vaccinated in hospital account for 80% + cases and deaths. So currently the vaccine efficacy is statistically 0% | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. That is true…the vaccines purpose is to mitigate the severity of the illness you get . Although there is a greater likelihood of B ending up in hospital than A (roughly around 6 times greater)… Okay… so let’s continue There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. Actually this is not true…. Research shows that if both get covid, again B spreads covid at a 6 times greater rate than A….. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. Actually in your example OP, person B chose not to act based on information that you gave that was incorrect… but let’s go on…. There is no conclusive information. There is conclusive information… there is research and there is continuing research to give the information we get better and better… whether people understand or believe that information is a separate topic… So again…. Let’s continue There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
Because misinforming people is a great way to get yourself noticed and stand out for all the right reasons……. And a merry Christmas to you!!!
That's not true, JCVI commented recently in their reasoning to not recommend vaccinations for children as being because vaccinated gain a larger viral load when infected than unvaxed and therefore transmit at 2-3 times higher rate. Also currently ONS data shows vaccinated in hospital account for 80% + cases and deaths. So currently the vaccine efficacy is statistically 0% "None of that is true and most of it doesn't make sense either. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. There is no conclusive information. There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating "Hahahahaha...nice one  Masturbation for the Nation | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. That is true…the vaccines purpose is to mitigate the severity of the illness you get . Although there is a greater likelihood of B ending up in hospital than A (roughly around 6 times greater)… Okay… so let’s continue There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. Actually this is not true…. Research shows that if both get covid, again B spreads covid at a 6 times greater rate than A….. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. Actually in your example OP, person B chose not to act based on information that you gave that was incorrect… but let’s go on…. There is no conclusive information. There is conclusive information… there is research and there is continuing research to give the information we get better and better… whether people understand or believe that information is a separate topic… So again…. Let’s continue There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
Because misinforming people is a great way to get yourself noticed and stand out for all the right reasons……. And a merry Christmas to you!!!
That's not true, JCVI commented recently in their reasoning to not recommend vaccinations for children as being because vaccinated gain a larger viral load when infected than unvaxed and therefore transmit at 2-3 times higher rate. Also currently ONS data shows vaccinated in hospital account for 80% + cases and deaths. So currently the vaccine efficacy is statistically 0%
None of that is true and most of it doesn't make sense either."Page 32 and 33 Public health England surveillance report week 49. Cases and death absolute numbers corroborate my statement above https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk › ...PDF COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report - week 49 - GOV.UK | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. That is true…the vaccines purpose is to mitigate the severity of the illness you get . Although there is a greater likelihood of B ending up in hospital than A (roughly around 6 times greater)… Okay… so let’s continue There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. Actually this is not true…. Research shows that if both get covid, again B spreads covid at a 6 times greater rate than A….. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. Actually in your example OP, person B chose not to act based on information that you gave that was incorrect… but let’s go on…. There is no conclusive information. There is conclusive information… there is research and there is continuing research to give the information we get better and better… whether people understand or believe that information is a separate topic… So again…. Let’s continue There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
Because misinforming people is a great way to get yourself noticed and stand out for all the right reasons……. And a merry Christmas to you!!!
That's not true, JCVI commented recently in their reasoning to not recommend vaccinations for children as being because vaccinated gain a larger viral load when infected than unvaxed and therefore transmit at 2-3 times higher rate. Also currently ONS data shows vaccinated in hospital account for 80% + cases and deaths. So currently the vaccine efficacy is statistically 0%
None of that is true and most of it doesn't make sense either.
Page 32 and 33 Public health England surveillance report week 49.
Cases and death absolute numbers corroborate my statement above
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk › ...PDF
COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report - week 49 - GOV.UK"https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10299077/Victoria-Derbyshire-reveals-triple-vaccinated-brother-caught-Covid-Christmas-meal.html | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. That is true…the vaccines purpose is to mitigate the severity of the illness you get . Although there is a greater likelihood of B ending up in hospital than A (roughly around 6 times greater)… Okay… so let’s continue There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. Actually this is not true…. Research shows that if both get covid, again B spreads covid at a 6 times greater rate than A….. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. Actually in your example OP, person B chose not to act based on information that you gave that was incorrect… but let’s go on…. There is no conclusive information. There is conclusive information… there is research and there is continuing research to give the information we get better and better… whether people understand or believe that information is a separate topic… So again…. Let’s continue There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
Because misinforming people is a great way to get yourself noticed and stand out for all the right reasons……. And a merry Christmas to you!!!
That's not true, JCVI commented recently in their reasoning to not recommend vaccinations for children as being because vaccinated gain a larger viral load when infected than unvaxed and therefore transmit at 2-3 times higher rate. Also currently ONS data shows vaccinated in hospital account for 80% + cases and deaths. So currently the vaccine efficacy is statistically 0%
None of that is true and most of it doesn't make sense either.
Page 32 and 33 Public health England surveillance report week 49.
Cases and death absolute numbers corroborate my statement above
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk › ...PDF
COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report - week 49 - GOV.UK"the really interesting table is on 35. Rates per 100,000. Absolute numbers, while true, don't account for how many people are vaccinated. The fact that mortality rates are 3 - 6x higher for unvaccinated show they have a notable effect. Also, can you proved a quote and link to the jvci load rationsle. That is news to me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"they are now saying they dont know how long the third jab will last all sound like a rushed job when they made the jabs big pharm looking at profit how many jabs will people end up with . tetly tea bag comes to mind " Pin cushion more like  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Doesn't seem like that on Ireland. In the pass couple of weeks have been dying around 40to 50 people a week. 98% vaccinated and is all in the hse data. Dont get your booster, is not worth it as they're not even leaving hospitality open after January with 94% vaccinated. Of that is working then I rather taking the chances. Go to your local protests as this is more about control and stabilising comunism than health Total rubbish but carry on "Baaaahhhh | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die. Person C has to forego that hip replacement because person B is taking up the ICU bed that may be needed." Persons D, E and F were involved in a multi-vehicle car accident with no ICU beds available due to beds being used by those refusing the vaccine. Refusing and unable due to medical reasons are two different scenarios but unfortunately both are at risk of a worse outcome. Just unfair on those that don't get a choice where others have activity taken it. Just need to look at the ICU loading for COVID for vaccinated and unvaccinated. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. There is no conclusive information. There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating "No opinion whatsoever on this. Choose whatever you think is right but around 80% of the population are vaccinated so the fight would be over in seconds | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. That is true…the vaccines purpose is to mitigate the severity of the illness you get . Although there is a greater likelihood of B ending up in hospital than A (roughly around 6 times greater)… Okay… so let’s continue There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. Actually this is not true…. Research shows that if both get covid, again B spreads covid at a 6 times greater rate than A….. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. Actually in your example OP, person B chose not to act based on information that you gave that was incorrect… but let’s go on…. There is no conclusive information. There is conclusive information… there is research and there is continuing research to give the information we get better and better… whether people understand or believe that information is a separate topic… So again…. Let’s continue There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
Because misinforming people is a great way to get yourself noticed and stand out for all the right reasons……. And a merry Christmas to you!!!
That's not true, JCVI commented recently in their reasoning to not recommend vaccinations for children as being because vaccinated gain a larger viral load when infected than unvaxed and therefore transmit at 2-3 times higher rate. Also currently ONS data shows vaccinated in hospital account for 80% + cases and deaths. So currently the vaccine efficacy is statistically 0%
None of that is true and most of it doesn't make sense either.
Page 32 and 33 Public health England surveillance report week 49.
Cases and death absolute numbers corroborate my statement above
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk › ...PDF
COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report - week 49 - GOV.UK
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10299077/Victoria-Derbyshire-reveals-triple-vaccinated-brother-caught-Covid-Christmas-meal.html"If you've had 3x jabs, catch it and die then the issue is more than likely is weakened immune or immunosuppression and the outcome would be the same. No jab is going to help if the immune system itself, is fucked!! The press should stop reporting this crap. Vaccines seem to work in 99.9% on variants prior to Omicron, of which jury is still out. 99.9% of millions jabbed suffer light or no side effects but like any medical treatment, some will react. 0.1% of 1million is 1000 who'll have a baddie, 999,000 didn't- feckin decent odds to me compared to dying with none. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Whilst everyone has been distracted by the Downing Street party the PHS quietly confirm that the vaccinated account for 9 out of every 10 convid deaths in the last four month's. Research people" What site is that information on? | |||
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) | |||
"I hate autocorrect for changing “ill” to I’ll for my whole message
I don’t recognise your stats but get the sentiment except...
“Person A has a 90% chance of not contracting the virus
Person B has A 90% chance of catching the virus”
Is completely wrong! The vaccine does not stop you catching Covid. THAT is why our infection numbers are so high when we also have such a high level of vaccination!
The vaccine significantly reduces the chance of developing serious symptoms/complications when you catch Covid.
There is no evidence I am aware of around an increased/decreased possibility of catching Covid for vaccinated vs unvaccinated."Well said  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Whilst everyone has been distracted by the Downing Street party the PHS quietly confirm that the vaccinated account for 9 out of every 10 convid deaths in the last four month's. Research people" That's because more people are vaccinated. The website you shared yells you where to look in the report. And the very same table has a mortality rate if unvaxx of being 3-5x higher than 2 or more doses. That's the headline. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die. Person C has to forego that hip replacement because person B is taking up the ICU bed that may be needed." This | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. That is true…the vaccines purpose is to mitigate the severity of the illness you get . Although there is a greater likelihood of B ending up in hospital than A (roughly around 6 times greater)… Okay… so let’s continue There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. Actually this is not true…. Research shows that if both get covid, again B spreads covid at a 6 times greater rate than A….. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. Actually in your example OP, person B chose not to act based on information that you gave that was incorrect… but let’s go on…. There is no conclusive information. There is conclusive information… there is research and there is continuing research to give the information we get better and better… whether people understand or believe that information is a separate topic… So again…. Let’s continue There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
Because misinforming people is a great way to get yourself noticed and stand out for all the right reasons……. And a merry Christmas to you!!!
That's not true, JCVI commented recently in their reasoning to not recommend vaccinations for children as being because vaccinated gain a larger viral load when infected than unvaxed and therefore transmit at 2-3 times higher rate. Also currently ONS data shows vaccinated in hospital account for 80% + cases and deaths. So currently the vaccine efficacy is statistically 0% "And we all know the earth is flat too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"People will chat to their doctor, collect a prescription and take all sorts of drugs with quite serious side effects - some can cause death don’t forget, and yet they take them. No worries about any aspect of it from ingredients to side effects. The vaccine has been used for years and people don’t question how the vaccine came to be used, they just queue up and get it. Some people have an illogical way of viewing covid vaccines. " Some drugs may also be in phase 4 but they don't checked to see if they are 'experimental'... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. That is true…the vaccines purpose is to mitigate the severity of the illness you get . Although there is a greater likelihood of B ending up in hospital than A (roughly around 6 times greater)… Okay… so let’s continue There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. Actually this is not true…. Research shows that if both get covid, again B spreads covid at a 6 times greater rate than A….. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. Actually in your example OP, person B chose not to act based on information that you gave that was incorrect… but let’s go on…. There is no conclusive information. There is conclusive information… there is research and there is continuing research to give the information we get better and better… whether people understand or believe that information is a separate topic… So again…. Let’s continue There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
Because misinforming people is a great way to get yourself noticed and stand out for all the right reasons……. And a merry Christmas to you!!!
That's not true, JCVI commented recently in their reasoning to not recommend vaccinations for children as being because vaccinated gain a larger viral load when infected than unvaxed and therefore transmit at 2-3 times higher rate. Also currently ONS data shows vaccinated in hospital account for 80% + cases and deaths. So currently the vaccine efficacy is statistically 0%
And we all know the earth is flat too. "At last | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Unfortunately main stream media labels those who research anti vaxers. We're vaccine free, free by choice. Same as those who are vaxxed are done so by choice unless illegally coerced by work which is against the Nuremberg code. We're heading for medical appartite and most can't see it." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Unfortunately main stream media labels those who research anti vaxers. We're vaccine free, free by choice. Same as those who are vaxxed are done so by choice unless illegally coerced by work which is against the Nuremberg code. We're heading for medical appartite and most can't see it." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"People will chat to their doctor, collect a prescription and take all sorts of drugs with quite serious side effects - some can cause death don’t forget, and yet they take them. No worries about any aspect of it from ingredients to side effects. The vaccine has been used for years and people don’t question how the vaccine came to be used, they just queue up and get it. Some people have an illogical way of viewing covid vaccines. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Unfortunately main stream media labels those who research anti vaxers. We're vaccine free, free by choice. Same as those who are vaxxed are done so by choice unless illegally coerced by work which is against the Nuremberg code. We're heading for medical appartite and most can't see it."
I agree people should be able to choose. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Unfortunately main stream media labels those who research anti vaxers. We're vaccine free, free by choice. Same as those who are vaxxed are done so by choice unless illegally coerced by work which is against the Nuremberg code. We're heading for medical appartite and most can't see it." How has MSM labelled me as anti vaxer? I am double jabbed... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There are plenty of folk who will believe what is spoon fed to them by the media." There are plenty of folk who will believe what is spoon fed to them by Karen on Facebook. Most of which easily disproved. Fortunately, some of us don't listen to either. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. There is no conclusive information. There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating "Bravo o well said lets get on with life and stop the petty sqables about whos jabed and whos not we all human with rights remember when if you were gay the straits hated gays now its accepted so lets accept unjabbed | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die. Person C has to forego that hip replacement because person B is taking up the ICU bed that may be needed. Actually B is 11 times more likely to need ICU care or die….." complete and utter horse shit ! Who told hog that ? Prince charles and Camilla ? You would swallow a brick. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What do pro vaccinated and anti vaxers have in common ? They'll never be fully vaccinated " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. That is true…the vaccines purpose is to mitigate the severity of the illness you get . Although there is a greater likelihood of B ending up in hospital than A (roughly around 6 times greater)… Okay… so let’s continue There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. Actually this is not true…. Research shows that if both get covid, again B spreads covid at a 6 times greater rate than A….. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. Actually in your example OP, person B chose not to act based on information that you gave that was incorrect… but let’s go on…. There is no conclusive information. There is conclusive information… there is research and there is continuing research to give the information we get better and better… whether people understand or believe that information is a separate topic… So again…. Let’s continue There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
Because misinforming people is a great way to get yourself noticed and stand out for all the right reasons……. And a merry Christmas to you!!!
That's not true, JCVI commented recently in their reasoning to not recommend vaccinations for children as being because vaccinated gain a larger viral load when infected than unvaxed and therefore transmit at 2-3 times higher rate. Also currently ONS data shows vaccinated in hospital account for 80% + cases and deaths. So currently the vaccine efficacy is statistically 0%
And we all know the earth is flat too.
At last "People need to consider that this pandemic is marked by a considerable amount of fake news and fake data. I traced the "vaccinated have higher viral loads than unvaccinated" to a story in the daily expose (viral load 251 X higher in vaccinated). That newspaper is hardly accurate, ever. I hope that the people ardently against vaccination remember their attitude today, if they contract a disease that is treatable by mRNA injection. Because most research of vaccines is now slanted towards mRNA. Ongoing research into mRNA treatment for prostate cancer and HIV is at the early trial stages. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. That is true…the vaccines purpose is to mitigate the severity of the illness you get . Although there is a greater likelihood of B ending up in hospital than A (roughly around 6 times greater)… Okay… so let’s continue There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. Actually this is not true…. Research shows that if both get covid, again B spreads covid at a 6 times greater rate than A….. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. Actually in your example OP, person B chose not to act based on information that you gave that was incorrect… but let’s go on…. There is no conclusive information. There is conclusive information… there is research and there is continuing research to give the information we get better and better… whether people understand or believe that information is a separate topic… So again…. Let’s continue There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
Because misinforming people is a great way to get yourself noticed and stand out for all the right reasons……. And a merry Christmas to you!!!
That's not true, JCVI commented recently in their reasoning to not recommend vaccinations for children as being because vaccinated gain a larger viral load when infected than unvaxed and therefore transmit at 2-3 times higher rate. Also currently ONS data shows vaccinated in hospital account for 80% + cases and deaths. So currently the vaccine efficacy is statistically 0%
And we all know the earth is flat too.
At last
People need to consider that this pandemic is marked by a considerable amount of fake news and fake data. I traced the "vaccinated have higher viral loads than unvaccinated" to a story in the daily expose (viral load 251 X higher in vaccinated). That newspaper is hardly accurate, ever.
I hope that the people ardently against vaccination remember their attitude today, if they contract a disease that is treatable by mRNA injection. Because most research of vaccines is now slanted towards mRNA. Ongoing research into mRNA treatment for prostate cancer and HIV is at the early trial stages."There is the claim that viral load is the same in vaccinated and unvaccinated. What those making the claim fail to mention is that in the same research they demonstrated that the viral load for the vaccinated at peak for a much shorter time. Therefore, they are infectious for less time. Therefore, they will infect less people... We know that the vaccine doesnt STOP transmission but it, based on the full research the antivaxers are carefully selecting from for their own arguement, the vaccine does reduce transmission. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die." I’m unjabbed …. Age 61 just had it … no need for Dr or Hospital majority of people don’t need hospital …. You’ve been brain washed | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die. I’m unjabbed …. Age 61 just had it … no need for Dr or Hospital majority of people don’t need hospital …. You’ve been brain washed " ……. Or you’ve been lucky perhaps? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I believe the difference between vaccinated and non vaccinated is that the vaccinated have bought into the vaxx passport, which is a digital platform which ultimately will contain all of your personal, medical history and financial information. It is a data passport and a participation passport. It is a digital ID. That's why vaccination is moving through all age cohorts to capture the whole population. Fiat currency has always failed as it is again now and a financial reset is needed - by the introduction of one digital currency through one central bank. With the fiat currency (cash) you have privacy, with digital currency, you have none (think about the tradesmen you like to pay in cash for a reduced rate as opposed to with a VAT invoice). In order to bring in digital currency, you need digital ID. These passports will be combined with a social credit score system and a carbon credit system (UN Agenda 2030). These passports to travel or access premises are only the precursor to what's to come. The new and coming digital ID system gives the people in charge the ability to cut your access to funds, health care, travel, food, or anything else whenever they please. There will be complete control over every aspect of your finances and where in the economy you can spend it or even how you will be taxed. It is my belief and that of SOME other non-vaccinated that this is not about health, it never has been - it's about control. That is the difference between SOME non-vaccinated people and vaccinated ones - not all obviously but many. And for those of us who are not vaccinated and believe this is about implementing a social credit system, no amount of data with regards to who transmits what and where and how safe and effective this "vaccine" is over another is going to convince us to go and get the jab!!! If this kind of control doesn't scare the bejeezus out of you, I don't know what will... And IF this is true, the years to come will show if it is, and you were warned and did nothing about it, well, on your own head be it. Because us non-vaccinated are quite literally fighting for what we believe is freedom in this context, freedom for our children and us to move through life as we have been in the Western democratic world. I couldn't give a flying fuck if there are lizard people, if the earth is flat or if anyone ever did land on the moon. I do give a fuck about the future of my children and how they get to live their life." All the data for the vaccine passport is already collected long before the pandemic. In fact the NHS app, not the covid app that has nothing to do with the NHS despite the branding, has been around for years. It was and is handy for tracking your appointments and prescriptions etc. The only really new thing is vaccine passport to travel. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die. I’m unjabbed …. Age 61 just had it … no need for Dr or Hospital majority of people don’t need hospital …. You’ve been brain washed " . Friend of ours 54 dead maybe he was brainwashed to for all the wrong reasons refused the vaccination because of all the crap he’d read about it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die. I’m unjabbed …. Age 61 just had it … no need for Dr or Hospital majority of people don’t need hospital …. You’ve been brain washed " Bizarre statement to make... Correct, the majority don't need hospital but you have responded to a post that breaks down those who do into vaccinated and unvaccinated. Please provide evidence broken down by age group, those admitted to hospital / ICU as a proportion of those vaccinated in each age group. Demonstrate that vaccination status has no impact from your findings... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"UK figures from Friday suggest that the ages with increasing infection rate are the 2yr to 12yr groups, and the 25yr to 49yr group. The 50yr to 90+yr groups have the lions-share of the deaths. However, if you are busy thinking "whoopee, get it on", I suggest a search of long-term damage of body organs post-virus infection. Look at brain and lung changes." What doesn't kill you, makes you stronger... Well, maybe not in the case of covid. For so many, it's about mortality and how it only affect people with underlying health conditions...covid can certainly give healthy people underlying health conditions... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Paying someone a lower rate for the avoidance of VAT is avoidance of TAX and against the law and the very reason cash should be banished. That's not really a good argument to avoid digital currency as 1) its TAX evasion 2) is selfish 3) avoiding to pay VAT is hurts the economy you expect to bail you out by furlough. If the treasury stated that during the next lockdown, we can't afford to pay 80% of salaries because too many individuals pay cash for services and don't declare the VAT, so there is no money in the pot? The sooner they ban cash completely the better society will be, harder to avoid rightfully due TAX, black market will be significantly imoacted, drug dealings will be traceable, shops and supermarkets less at risk of armed robbery, fewer muggings and many other benefits from it. Pay what's due if it is expected that the government shall bail people out... As for vaccination as a way of controlling a population, you can fall for that kind of rubbish, but I ain't. Something strange just happened, just put a magnet on my arm where I was booster jabbed last week and its pulling something deep in my arm.. I've let go of the magnet and it's staying put - anyone tell me why??" You are probably suffering from Hemochromatosis (he-moe-kroe-muh-TOE-sis)I suggest regular blood letting, ask your doctor to fit a tap. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I believe the difference between vaccinated and non vaccinated is that the vaccinated have bought into the vaxx passport, which is a digital platform which ultimately will contain all of your personal, medical history and financial information. It is a data passport and a participation passport. It is a digital ID. That's why vaccination is moving through all age cohorts to capture the whole population. Fiat currency has always failed as it is again now and a financial reset is needed - by the introduction of one digital currency through one central bank. With the fiat currency (cash) you have privacy, with digital currency, you have none (think about the tradesmen you like to pay in cash for a reduced rate as opposed to with a VAT invoice). In order to bring in digital currency, you need digital ID. These passports will be combined with a social credit score system and a carbon credit system (UN Agenda 2030). These passports to travel or access premises are only the precursor to what's to come. The new and coming digital ID system gives the people in charge the ability to cut your access to funds, health care, travel, food, or anything else whenever they please. There will be complete control over every aspect of your finances and where in the economy you can spend it or even how you will be taxed. It is my belief and that of SOME other non-vaccinated that this is not about health, it never has been - it's about control. That is the difference between SOME non-vaccinated people and vaccinated ones - not all obviously but many. And for those of us who are not vaccinated and believe this is about implementing a social credit system, no amount of data with regards to who transmits what and where and how safe and effective this "vaccine" is over another is going to convince us to go and get the jab!!! If this kind of control doesn't scare the bejeezus out of you, I don't know what will... And IF this is true, the years to come will show if it is, and you were warned and did nothing about it, well, on your own head be it. Because us non-vaccinated are quite literally fighting for what we believe is freedom in this context, freedom for our children and us to move through life as we have been in the Western democratic world. I couldn't give a flying fuck if there are lizard people, if the earth is flat or if anyone ever did land on the moon. I do give a fuck about the future of my children and how they get to live their life. All the data for the vaccine passport is already collected long before the pandemic. In fact the NHS app, not the covid app that has nothing to do with the NHS despite the branding, has been around for years. It was and is handy for tracking your appointments and prescriptions etc. The only really new thing is vaccine passport to travel." You're missing my point. It doesn't matter what the name of the App is that contains your vaccination status. It is about the platform behind it and its capabilities with regards to storing all of your personal, medical and financial information, who has access to it and how it is used, regulated and controlled. What I'm talking about above is obviously a process and will take time, it's not going to happen from one day to the next. One digital ID for everyone, one Central Bank, one digital currency, with all the information you can possibly think of in one place - personal, medical, financial (all your in and out goings), criminal, internet access, phone, details of the car you drive, the fuel you use, the electricity you use, public transport, the movies and shows you watch on TV, the restaurants, pubs and clubs you visit, the take-outs you treat yourself to, the children you have... And now in certain countries you need a vaxx cert to gain access to certain premises. The day will come when carbon credits are introduced. One journey to a family member who was in need and an additional take out containing red meat too many early on in the month, no more fuel or public transport to get to work or you'll be sitting in a cold office working from home - because these are the kind of controls that will be implemented with the social credit system. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I believe the difference between vaccinated and non vaccinated is that the vaccinated have bought into the vaxx passport, which is a digital platform which ultimately will contain all of your personal, medical history and financial information. It is a data passport and a participation passport. It is a digital ID. That's why vaccination is moving through all age cohorts to capture the whole population. Fiat currency has always failed as it is again now and a financial reset is needed - by the introduction of one digital currency through one central bank. With the fiat currency (cash) you have privacy, with digital currency, you have none (think about the tradesmen you like to pay in cash for a reduced rate as opposed to with a VAT invoice). In order to bring in digital currency, you need digital ID. These passports will be combined with a social credit score system and a carbon credit system (UN Agenda 2030). These passports to travel or access premises are only the precursor to what's to come. The new and coming digital ID system gives the people in charge the ability to cut your access to funds, health care, travel, food, or anything else whenever they please. There will be complete control over every aspect of your finances and where in the economy you can spend it or even how you will be taxed. It is my belief and that of SOME other non-vaccinated that this is not about health, it never has been - it's about control. That is the difference between SOME non-vaccinated people and vaccinated ones - not all obviously but many. And for those of us who are not vaccinated and believe this is about implementing a social credit system, no amount of data with regards to who transmits what and where and how safe and effective this "vaccine" is over another is going to convince us to go and get the jab!!! If this kind of control doesn't scare the bejeezus out of you, I don't know what will... And IF this is true, the years to come will show if it is, and you were warned and did nothing about it, well, on your own head be it. Because us non-vaccinated are quite literally fighting for what we believe is freedom in this context, freedom for our children and us to move through life as we have been in the Western democratic world. I couldn't give a flying fuck if there are lizard people, if the earth is flat or if anyone ever did land on the moon. I do give a fuck about the future of my children and how they get to live their life. All the data for the vaccine passport is already collected long before the pandemic. In fact the NHS app, not the covid app that has nothing to do with the NHS despite the branding, has been around for years. It was and is handy for tracking your appointments and prescriptions etc. The only really new thing is vaccine passport to travel. You're missing my point. It doesn't matter what the name of the App is that contains your vaccination status. It is about the platform behind it and its capabilities with regards to storing all of your personal, medical and financial information, who has access to it and how it is used, regulated and controlled. What I'm talking about above is obviously a process and will take time, it's not going to happen from one day to the next. One digital ID for everyone, one Central Bank, one digital currency, with all the information you can possibly think of in one place - personal, medical, financial (all your in and out goings), criminal, internet access, phone, details of the car you drive, the fuel you use, the electricity you use, public transport, the movies and shows you watch on TV, the restaurants, pubs and clubs you visit, the take-outs you treat yourself to, the children you have... And now in certain countries you need a vaxx cert to gain access to certain premises. The day will come when carbon credits are introduced. One journey to a family member who was in need and an additional take out containing red meat too many early on in the month, no more fuel or public transport to get to work or you'll be sitting in a cold office working from home - because these are the kind of controls that will be implemented with the social credit system. " Surely if someone really wanted to find most of that out that can now. We pretty much all carry a mobile phone. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Paying someone a lower rate for the avoidance of VAT is avoidance of TAX and against the law and the very reason cash should be banished. That's not really a good argument to avoid digital currency as 1) its TAX evasion 2) is selfish 3) avoiding to pay VAT is hurts the economy you expect to bail you out by furlough. If the treasury stated that during the next lockdown, we can't afford to pay 80% of salaries because too many individuals pay cash for services and don't declare the VAT, so there is no money in the pot? The sooner they ban cash completely the better society will be, harder to avoid rightfully due TAX, black market will be significantly imoacted, drug dealings will be traceable, shops and supermarkets less at risk of armed robbery, fewer muggings and many other benefits from it. Pay what's due if it is expected that the government shall bail people out... As for vaccination as a way of controlling a population, you can fall for that kind of rubbish, but I ain't. Something strange just happened, just put a magnet on my arm where I was booster jabbed last week and its pulling something deep in my arm.. I've let go of the magnet and it's staying put - anyone tell me why??" I agree, the tax system can be abused with the existence of cash. With the system I was explaining above, that, along with EVERYTHING else is out of your control. With the social credit system you can and will be controlled into spending where it is needed and/or wanted, and is open to be abused by the system to manipulate, co-erce and/or stop you spending where you want or need, to go places you want to go etc. I hope that booster works out well for you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I believe the difference between vaccinated and non vaccinated is that the vaccinated have bought into the vaxx passport, which is a digital platform which ultimately will contain all of your personal, medical history and financial information. It is a data passport and a participation passport. It is a digital ID. That's why vaccination is moving through all age cohorts to capture the whole population. Fiat currency has always failed as it is again now and a financial reset is needed - by the introduction of one digital currency through one central bank. With the fiat currency (cash) you have privacy, with digital currency, you have none (think about the tradesmen you like to pay in cash for a reduced rate as opposed to with a VAT invoice). In order to bring in digital currency, you need digital ID. These passports will be combined with a social credit score system and a carbon credit system (UN Agenda 2030). These passports to travel or access premises are only the precursor to what's to come. The new and coming digital ID system gives the people in charge the ability to cut your access to funds, health care, travel, food, or anything else whenever they please. There will be complete control over every aspect of your finances and where in the economy you can spend it or even how you will be taxed. It is my belief and that of SOME other non-vaccinated that this is not about health, it never has been - it's about control. That is the difference between SOME non-vaccinated people and vaccinated ones - not all obviously but many. And for those of us who are not vaccinated and believe this is about implementing a social credit system, no amount of data with regards to who transmits what and where and how safe and effective this "vaccine" is over another is going to convince us to go and get the jab!!! If this kind of control doesn't scare the bejeezus out of you, I don't know what will... And IF this is true, the years to come will show if it is, and you were warned and did nothing about it, well, on your own head be it. Because us non-vaccinated are quite literally fighting for what we believe is freedom in this context, freedom for our children and us to move through life as we have been in the Western democratic world. I couldn't give a flying fuck if there are lizard people, if the earth is flat or if anyone ever did land on the moon. I do give a fuck about the future of my children and how they get to live their life. All the data for the vaccine passport is already collected long before the pandemic. In fact the NHS app, not the covid app that has nothing to do with the NHS despite the branding, has been around for years. It was and is handy for tracking your appointments and prescriptions etc. The only really new thing is vaccine passport to travel. You're missing my point. It doesn't matter what the name of the App is that contains your vaccination status. It is about the platform behind it and its capabilities with regards to storing all of your personal, medical and financial information, who has access to it and how it is used, regulated and controlled. What I'm talking about above is obviously a process and will take time, it's not going to happen from one day to the next. One digital ID for everyone, one Central Bank, one digital currency, with all the information you can possibly think of in one place - personal, medical, financial (all your in and out goings), criminal, internet access, phone, details of the car you drive, the fuel you use, the electricity you use, public transport, the movies and shows you watch on TV, the restaurants, pubs and clubs you visit, the take-outs you treat yourself to, the children you have... And now in certain countries you need a vaxx cert to gain access to certain premises. The day will come when carbon credits are introduced. One journey to a family member who was in need and an additional take out containing red meat too many early on in the month, no more fuel or public transport to get to work or you'll be sitting in a cold office working from home - because these are the kind of controls that will be implemented with the social credit system. Surely if someone really wanted to find most of that out that can now. We pretty much all carry a mobile phone. " I give up... social credit system here we come
| |||
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) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm wondering where people are getting their statistics from? I've seen 4 times more likely, 9 times more likely, 11 times more likely... I think you guys bold enough yo post statistics should tell us how those statistics were collated. Was it in invetro testing? Was it in alpha and beta testing the vaccine? Is it real time data being updated periodically by the NHS and ONS? I bet there can be holes poked in each of these methods. I advise people to think very carefully before creating posts passing off "facts." There seems to be a lot of people talking about issues they aren't educated to talk about." Maybe you should enlighten us. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Maybe you should enlighten us." After those who have so confidently presented "facts" cite their sources with links. I have no problem them proceeding to tell them why they are wrong and what is wrong with their sources. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Maybe you should enlighten us. After those who have so confidently presented "facts" cite their sources with links. I have no problem them proceeding to tell them why they are wrong and what is wrong with their sources." No it’s ok you can go first, what sources are you using? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" No it’s ok you can go first, what sources are you using?" Wait wait wait. My original post was telling people to cite their sources. I didn't make any claims. Other than holes could easily be poked at peoples sources. As someone that has made claims. Post YOUR sources. Substantiate YOUR claims. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" No it’s ok you can go first, what sources are you using? Wait wait wait. My original post was telling people to cite their sources. I didn't make any claims. Other than holes could easily be poked at peoples sources. As someone that has made claims. Post YOUR sources. Substantiate YOUR claims. " Well you did make a number of claims , one being you could poke holes in other peoples sources. I only ask because almost every statistic or link that I’ve seen anti vaxxers / conspiracy theorist post has turned out to be either made up, misquoted or misunderstood. I accept there are people who have a better understanding of the Science than me, but when medics tell me about the reality of what’s happened over the last two years, I’m inclined to believe the scientists when they tell us something isn’t quite right. And as several people people have pointed out, why in the world would governments of all persuasions, cultures and political ideologies being going along with the notion that there isn’t a pandemic sweeping the world to cover up some sinister plot. Why would they all be putting their populations through this. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. " Except A and B cannot both be correct just because they believed something, one of the two has to be the best (correct) option. Big difference between thinking you are correct and actually being correct. Also your argument is flawed; it is fact that you have a much, much smaller chance of getting infected in the first place if you have the vaccine than if you remain unvaccinated. So it isn’t more risk of A infecting B, it is a much lower risk because A is significantly less likely to be infected in the first place. Sorry, I know that spoils the game but that’s statistics/reality for you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Well you did make a number of claims , one being you could poke holes in other peoples sources. I only ask because almost every statistic or link that I’ve seen anti vaxxers / conspiracy theorist post has turned out to be either made up, misquoted or misunderstood. I accept there are people who have a better understanding of the Science than me, but when medics tell me about the reality of what’s happened over the last two years, I’m inclined to believe the scientists when they tell us something isn’t quite right. And as several people people have pointed out, why in the world would governments of all persuasions, cultures and political ideologies being going along with the notion that there isn’t a pandemic sweeping the world to cover up some sinister plot. Why would they all be putting their populations through this." So what I am taking from this is, that you will not be substantiating your claims and you will not be employing any critical thinking. Instead you will employ and argument based on authority. And instead resorting to calling all people who disagree "anti vaxers." Regardless of whether they have advocated for other, more well research vaccines e.g. TB. Regardless of how poorly collated the stats are e.g. stats not adjusted for false positive rate. You will instead put their view points down as some sort of tin hat conspiracy. Not that the government have presented false stats before to pass legislation and then implemented gag orders to prevent the MSM talking about it like they did with the 1998 gun ban. Which lead to a rise in gun and violent crime which took over a decade to drop to their before ban levels. Or the time they banned the pit bull when they amalgamated the small pit bull attack stats with that of uncategorised dog attacks. It's odd that a dog that weighs less than 30kg is deemed so dangerous when a 100kg English mastiff is legal. So it isn't as though the government has never mislead the people and fellow MPs to push legislation through parliament. But don't worry lad. You do you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Except A and B cannot both be correct just because they believed something, one of the two has to be the best (correct) option. Big difference between thinking you are correct and actually being correct. Also your argument is flawed; it is fact that you have a much, much smaller chance of getting infected in the first place if you have the vaccine than if you remain unvaccinated. So it isn’t more risk of A infecting B, it is a much lower risk because A is significantly less likely to be infected in the first place. Sorry, I know that spoils the game but that’s statistics/reality for you. " And how was this proven? Was it invetro? Was it via alpha testing? Beta testing? Are they figures based on NHS and ONS finding that are adjusted overtime? Please present your source. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There are plenty of folk who will believe what is spoon fed to them by the media. There are plenty of folk who will believe what is spoon fed to them by Karen on Facebook. Most of which easily disproved. Fortunately, some of us don't listen to either." That's the best way. Be critical about everything or don't have a view. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. Except A and B cannot both be correct just because they believed something, one of the two has to be the best (correct) option. Big difference between thinking you are correct and actually being correct. Also your argument is flawed; it is fact that you have a much, much smaller chance of getting infected in the first place if you have the vaccine than if you remain unvaccinated. So it isn’t more risk of A infecting B, it is a much lower risk because A is significantly less likely to be infected in the first place. Sorry, I know that spoils the game but that’s statistics/reality for you. " The risk of adverse events from the vaccine is zero when you don't take the vaccine. I'll take my chances on Covid any day. I don't trust the pharmaceutical companies who have a history of criminal charges coming out their noses and never actually being held accountable, just like the government is never held accountable. Plenty of whistleblowers out there that the trials were not carried out in any way ethically, to the extent that vaccine injured participants were not only left high and dry but also their results excluded from the official data. Obviously this doesn't make mainstream news. Or is "debunked" by fact checkers employed by the state driving a narrative. The bottom line is, pharmaceutical companies only profit when their client base is ill so good luck with your vaccine (which it isn't - traditional definition of a vaccine is it stops you getting infected and transmitting it but hey, with that terminology pharmaceutical companies automatically get indemnified of any liability, look it up - any manufacturer of a vaccine automatically gets liability indemnity, call it a (experimental) medical treatment, they don't). You've been had... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As there is a so much dispute around just how much the unvaccinated are driving transmission and hospitisation the time has come to find out for certain. I propose the immediate and complete lockdown of all the unvaccinated until 2022. Three weeks should give us the data to settle the argument once and for all. Now is the ideal time given many will be having time off anyway. " Lock down the vaccinated and let the non vaccinated run riot - see what happens then, be so much more interesting, wouldn't it, no? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I refuse to live in a society where my only ticket to freedom is an annual state vaccination to deal with every new variant that emerges and a subsequent passport to prove I’ve been jabbed. Enough is enough" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As there is a so much dispute around just how much the unvaccinated are driving transmission and hospitisation the time has come to find out for certain. I propose the immediate and complete lockdown of all the unvaccinated until 2022. Three weeks should give us the data to settle the argument once and for all. Now is the ideal time given many will be having time off anyway. Lock down the vaccinated and let the non vaccinated run riot - see what happens then, be so much more interesting, wouldn't it, no? ". Sorry it has to be my way, with most of population vaccinated your way would provide far less useful data whilst adversely affecting far more people. So yes, time to lock up the unvaxed until the new year. If the unvaxed hold firm to their beliefs they should welcome the opportunity to prove them | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I refuse to live in a society where my only ticket to freedom is an annual state vaccination to deal with every new variant that emerges and a subsequent passport to prove I’ve been jabbed. Enough is enough" With rights come responsibilities, don’t like it, then you are welcome to leave | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. There is no conclusive information. There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating "This is why STEM education is so crucial! Don’t be a forum scientist if your science and maths education did not last beyond your teens. Yikes! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As there is a so much dispute around just how much the unvaccinated are driving transmission and hospitisation the time has come to find out for certain. I propose the immediate and complete lockdown of all the unvaccinated until 2022. Three weeks should give us the data to settle the argument once and for all. Now is the ideal time given many will be having time off anyway. Lock down the vaccinated and let the non vaccinated run riot - see what happens then, be so much more interesting, wouldn't it, no?
. Sorry it has to be my way, with most of population vaccinated your way would provide far less useful data whilst adversely affecting far more people. So yes, time to lock up the unvaxed until the new year. If the unvaxed hold firm to their beliefs they should welcome the opportunity to prove them "I'm not sure how it would adversely affect far more people? Unless you mean the number of people locked down - and sure, wouldn't it give you exactly the data you need? That there's no breakouts or serious hospitalisation in the vaxxed and transmission, hospitalisation with severe disease and death mainly happens in the non vaxxed. And then you've also eliminated some of us dirty undesirables
I don't have the need to prove anything. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I refuse to live in a society where my only ticket to freedom is an annual state vaccination to deal with every new variant that emerges and a subsequent passport to prove I’ve been jabbed. Enough is enough" Bye then | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Except A and B cannot both be correct just because they believed something, one of the two has to be the best (correct) option. Big difference between thinking you are correct and actually being correct. Also your argument is flawed; it is fact that you have a much, much smaller chance of getting infected in the first place if you have the vaccine than if you remain unvaccinated. So it isn’t more risk of A infecting B, it is a much lower risk because A is significantly less likely to be infected in the first place. Sorry, I know that spoils the game but that’s statistics/reality for you. And how was this proven? Was it invetro? Was it via alpha testing? Beta testing? Are they figures based on NHS and ONS finding that are adjusted overtime? Please present your source." It’s very clear you don’t have a clue what invetro [sic] testing is, or you wouldn’t be asking this question in response to my comment. Start with works published by Imperial and credible journals such as New Scientist. To find these, ask the question in Google - “does vaccine reduce the risk of Covid infection?” Or similar. Then go and get your jabs, protect yourself and those around you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Except A and B cannot both be correct just because they believed something, one of the two has to be the best (correct) option. Big difference between thinking you are correct and actually being correct. Also your argument is flawed; it is fact that you have a much, much smaller chance of getting infected in the first place if you have the vaccine than if you remain unvaccinated. So it isn’t more risk of A infecting B, it is a much lower risk because A is significantly less likely to be infected in the first place. Sorry, I know that spoils the game but that’s statistics/reality for you. And how was this proven? Was it invetro? Was it via alpha testing? Beta testing? Are they figures based on NHS and ONS finding that are adjusted overtime? Please present your source. It’s very clear you don’t have a clue what invetro [sic] testing is, or you wouldn’t be asking this question in response to my comment. Start with works published by Imperial and credible journals such as New Scientist. To find these, ask the question in Google - “does vaccine reduce the risk of Covid infection?” Or similar. Then go and get your jabs, protect yourself and those around you." there was so something on looking at household transmission rates. Went from something like a 35pc chance of catching Covid if your are unvaxx and in a house with a vivid case to 25pc if vaxxed. Don't recall the details. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As there is a so much dispute around just how much the unvaccinated are driving transmission and hospitisation the time has come to find out for certain. I propose the immediate and complete lockdown of all the unvaccinated until 2022. Three weeks should give us the data to settle the argument once and for all. Now is the ideal time given many will be having time off anyway. Lock down the vaccinated and let the non vaccinated run riot - see what happens then, be so much more interesting, wouldn't it, no?
. Sorry it has to be my way, with most of population vaccinated your way would provide far less useful data whilst adversely affecting far more people. So yes, time to lock up the unvaxed until the new year. If the unvaxed hold firm to their beliefs they should welcome the opportunity to prove them
I'm not sure how it would adversely affect far more people? Unless you mean the number of people locked down - and sure, wouldn't it give you exactly the data you need? That there's no breakouts or serious hospitalisation in the vaxxed and transmission, hospitalisation with severe disease and death mainly happens in the non vaxxed. And then you've also eliminated some of us dirty undesirables
I don't have the need to prove anything. ". Well given all the evidence to date lies in favour of vaccination you really have plenty to try and prove. I don’t want anyone eliminated, just the heading off of a wave of infection before we see an unmanageable load landing on the health services. Right now the unvaccinated are putting a disproportionate pressure on healthcare services and are in all scientific likelihood responsible for a disproportionately high proportion of super spreader events. Just put on your big boy and girl pants you big anti vacation babies | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As there is a so much dispute around just how much the unvaccinated are driving transmission and hospitisation the time has come to find out for certain. I propose the immediate and complete lockdown of all the unvaccinated until 2022. Three weeks should give us the data to settle the argument once and for all. Now is the ideal time given many will be having time off anyway. Lock down the vaccinated and let the non vaccinated run riot - see what happens then, be so much more interesting, wouldn't it, no?
. Sorry it has to be my way, with most of population vaccinated your way would provide far less useful data whilst adversely affecting far more people. So yes, time to lock up the unvaxed until the new year. If the unvaxed hold firm to their beliefs they should welcome the opportunity to prove them
I'm not sure how it would adversely affect far more people? Unless you mean the number of people locked down - and sure, wouldn't it give you exactly the data you need? That there's no breakouts or serious hospitalisation in the vaxxed and transmission, hospitalisation with severe disease and death mainly happens in the non vaxxed. And then you've also eliminated some of us dirty undesirables
I don't have the need to prove anything.
. Well given all the evidence to date lies in favour of vaccination you really have plenty to try and prove. I don’t want anyone eliminated, just the heading off of a wave of infection before we see an unmanageable load landing on the health services. Right now the unvaccinated are putting a disproportionate pressure on healthcare services and are in all scientific likelihood responsible for a disproportionately high proportion of super spreader events. Just put on your big boy and girl pants you big anti vacation babies "As a vaccinated person I am going to challenge this. You say... “and are in all scientific likelihood responsible for a disproportionately high proportion of super spreader events” Really? What evidence do you have for that statement? Can you provide a link to a reputable source to back up such a sweeping statement? If you can’t, then that statement is about as much use as a chocolate tea pot! If you can, then I would be very interested to read that! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As there is a so much dispute around just how much the unvaccinated are driving transmission and hospitisation the time has come to find out for certain. I propose the immediate and complete lockdown of all the unvaccinated until 2022. Three weeks should give us the data to settle the argument once and for all. Now is the ideal time given many will be having time off anyway. Lock down the vaccinated and let the non vaccinated run riot - see what happens then, be so much more interesting, wouldn't it, no?
. Sorry it has to be my way, with most of population vaccinated your way would provide far less useful data whilst adversely affecting far more people. So yes, time to lock up the unvaxed until the new year. If the unvaxed hold firm to their beliefs they should welcome the opportunity to prove them
I'm not sure how it would adversely affect far more people? Unless you mean the number of people locked down - and sure, wouldn't it give you exactly the data you need? That there's no breakouts or serious hospitalisation in the vaxxed and transmission, hospitalisation with severe disease and death mainly happens in the non vaxxed. And then you've also eliminated some of us dirty undesirables
I don't have the need to prove anything.
. Well given all the evidence to date lies in favour of vaccination you really have plenty to try and prove. I don’t want anyone eliminated, just the heading off of a wave of infection before we see an unmanageable load landing on the health services. Right now the unvaccinated are putting a disproportionate pressure on healthcare services and are in all scientific likelihood responsible for a disproportionately high proportion of super spreader events. Just put on your big boy and girl pants you big anti vacation babies
As a vaccinated person I am going to challenge this. You say...
“and are in all scientific likelihood responsible for a disproportionately high proportion of super spreader events”
Really? What evidence do you have for that statement? Can you provide a link to a reputable source to back up such a sweeping statement? If you can’t, then that statement is about as much use as a chocolate tea pot! If you can, then I would be very interested to read that!"There are few certainties but there is plenty of evidence to support that theory. There are a number of studies that show peak viral load declines much faster in vaccinated than unvaccinated therefore unvaccinated are in all likelihood more infectious for more time. There are other studies that show transmission between members of unvaccinated households is statistically greater than between those living in vaccinated household. It may well eventually turn out Covid vaccination or some Covid vaccines do not reduce transmission but in all likelihood they do. It may only be by a small margin but small margins can still result in very different outcomes. Those making the decisions can either sit back, wait for “perfect” science and watch until hospitals overflow or try make best calls to head that off based on best assessments and scientific likelihoods... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As there is a so much dispute around just how much the unvaccinated are driving transmission and hospitisation the time has come to find out for certain. I propose the immediate and complete lockdown of all the unvaccinated until 2022. Three weeks should give us the data to settle the argument once and for all. Now is the ideal time given many will be having time off anyway. Lock down the vaccinated and let the non vaccinated run riot - see what happens then, be so much more interesting, wouldn't it, no?
. Sorry it has to be my way, with most of population vaccinated your way would provide far less useful data whilst adversely affecting far more people. So yes, time to lock up the unvaxed until the new year. If the unvaxed hold firm to their beliefs they should welcome the opportunity to prove them
I'm not sure how it would adversely affect far more people? Unless you mean the number of people locked down - and sure, wouldn't it give you exactly the data you need? That there's no breakouts or serious hospitalisation in the vaxxed and transmission, hospitalisation with severe disease and death mainly happens in the non vaxxed. And then you've also eliminated some of us dirty undesirables
I don't have the need to prove anything.
. Well given all the evidence to date lies in favour of vaccination you really have plenty to try and prove. I don’t want anyone eliminated, just the heading off of a wave of infection before we see an unmanageable load landing on the health services. Right now the unvaccinated are putting a disproportionate pressure on healthcare services and are in all scientific likelihood responsible for a disproportionately high proportion of super spreader events. Just put on your big boy and girl pants you big anti vacation babies
As a vaccinated person I am going to challenge this. You say...
“and are in all scientific likelihood responsible for a disproportionately high proportion of super spreader events”
Really? What evidence do you have for that statement? Can you provide a link to a reputable source to back up such a sweeping statement? If you can’t, then that statement is about as much use as a chocolate tea pot! If you can, then I would be very interested to read that!
There are few certainties but there is plenty of evidence to support that theory. There are a number of studies that show peak viral load declines much faster in vaccinated than unvaccinated therefore unvaccinated are in all likelihood more infectious for more time. There are other studies that show transmission between members of unvaccinated households is statistically greater than between those living in vaccinated household. It may well eventually turn out Covid vaccination or some Covid vaccines do not reduce transmission but in all likelihood they do. It may only be by a small margin but small margins can still result in very different outcomes. Those making the decisions can either sit back, wait for “perfect” science and watch until hospitals overflow or try make best calls to head that off based on best assessments and scientific likelihoods..."I get the theory and it may well be correct. However, you stated something as fact which it clearly isn’t. Data supporting a hypothesis is not fact. Again though, I would welcome links (or specific search strings) that lead to these studies your refer to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you did your own research and fact digging you'd soon find out what it was all about .. people will believe anything the news tells them .. it's actually scary how people refuse to use their own intelligence and common sense.. I'd never risk my child's health injecting poison into them .. I never took a vaccine and was never effected I'm healthy fit and strong and always will be .. don't like my opinion ? Go fuck yourself " Any ideas where to do my own research apart from reputable news sources from multiple different countries and peer reviewed studies and papers? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you did your own research and fact digging you'd soon find out what it was all about .. people will believe anything the news tells them .. it's actually scary how people refuse to use their own intelligence and common sense.. I'd never risk my child's health injecting poison into them .. I never took a vaccine and was never effected I'm healthy fit and strong and always will be .. don't like my opinion ? Go fuck yourself " Your kids are totally unvaccinated? What about measles or mumps?  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you did your own research and fact digging you'd soon find out what it was all about .. people will believe anything the news tells them .. it's actually scary how people refuse to use their own intelligence and common sense.. I'd never risk my child's health injecting poison into them .. I never took a vaccine and was never effected I'm healthy fit and strong and always will be .. don't like my opinion ? Go fuck yourself " I did a lot of research before letting my vulnerable daughter have the tried and tested vaccine. Every time some new horror story came out about possible issues, I'd then question if I'd done the right thing, and again research and check. Whilst my degree wasn't in anything virus related, it did teach me how to look at research and statistics. I'm very glad I decided to let my vulnerable daughter have her 4 vaccines... along with the ones she had in her early years... she actually couldn't have the mmr. Had to have it separately. I wouldn't put poison in my kids either | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you did your own research and fact digging you'd soon find out what it was all about .. people will believe anything the news tells them .. it's actually scary how people refuse to use their own intelligence and common sense.. I'd never risk my child's health injecting poison into them .. I never took a vaccine and was never effected I'm healthy fit and strong and always will be .. don't like my opinion ? Go fuck yourself " Rather vague. Which 'poison' being injected, are you referring to? Which vaccines? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you did your own research and fact digging you'd soon find out what it was all about .. people will believe anything the news tells them .. it's actually scary how people refuse to use their own intelligence and common sense.. I'd never risk my child's health injecting poison into them .. I never took a vaccine and was never effected I'm healthy fit and strong and always will be .. don't like my opinion ? Go fuck yourself Rather vague. Which 'poison' being injected, are you referring to? Which vaccines? " I love it, this vaccine forum never ceases to produce the goodies. First part of post all very nice regarding research and digging up information but in reality it's about finding articles that sit alongside your bias and point of view, which is fine but under no circumstances can it be classed as research. Nevertheless, what seems to look like a reasonable post finishes with a finale of.... Wait for it... If you don't like my opinion (or research as it was referred to) Go fuck yourself... If only the medical advisors watched each night on TV alongside the PM hadn't rephrased their statements, the viewing figures would have soared. Brilliant, love it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die." no, why spread misinformation check covid weekly vaccine report from gov UK. It actually shows boosted get more covid | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you did your own research and fact digging you'd soon find out what it was all about .. people will believe anything the news tells them .. it's actually scary how people refuse to use their own intelligence and common sense.. I'd never risk my child's health injecting poison into them .. I never took a vaccine and was never effected I'm healthy fit and strong and always will be .. don't like my opinion ? Go fuck yourself " absolutely, what’s worrying is how people rely on institutions (historically, decisions made by government or a institution don’t usually make good decisions for people, they have never been these benevolent decision makers) rather than their instincts on such matters | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Although an awful lot of people have developed medical conditions or had heart attacks after the jab to which they had no history of before they had it but that doesn’t seem to get spoken about in the news and you can’t talk about it on social media as any comments negative towards the jab get muted . I’ve literally seen this scenario in plenty of customers of work for and three of my own family members ." probably because its not happened. If people were having heart attacks from the vaccines they would have never have seen the light of day. Thing is before now we have never had a vaccine program on such a grand scale. Obviously people find they have random health issues all the time.. and heart attacks do just happen. However due to everyone looking at this so intensely, it's much more noticeable. I was reading a report online ( trying to find it if anyone else has read it) and it was about how many side effects people had reported while testing the vaccine. Only just as many if not higher side effects in the placebo injection were reported in the first 28days..... There is still far to much misinformation out there, I'm just getting over covid for the 2nd time.. and I'm so very glad I've had my vaccines as first time was so much worse xx.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you did your own research and fact digging you'd soon find out what it was all about .. people will believe anything the news tells them .. it's actually scary how people refuse to use their own intelligence and common sense.. I'd never risk my child's health injecting poison into them .. I never took a vaccine and was never effected I'm healthy fit and strong and always will be .. don't like my opinion ? Go fuck yourself " One thing isn’t clear. Sense is not common and neither is intelligence, particularly in those who spout “do your own research” | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die. Person C has to forego that hip replacement because person B is taking up the ICU bed that may be needed. Actually B is 11 times more likely to need ICU care or die….." I taught all the Bs would be dead by now? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. There is no conclusive information. There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating "I think you, pick any letter to describe yourself, needs to get out and chat to real people an awful lot more. If you need proof. Next time you step outside, go to one of the many coffee shops and articulate your A / B statement to a total stranger. Good luck. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
A has their story
B has theirs
Accept each other story move along be happy were all still here and stop being dicks about it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die." Can you give the actual data to support those 'facts' that you have put down please. I might be wrong but I think you're exaggerating the figures in your example Where has this 4 to 5 times more likely come from? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die." as a caveat to all this the above protective effects start waning after week 3 until the are practically indistinguishable after 12 weeks! How about the potential for vaxed to spread more efficiently as the are more Likely to be symptom free while carrying the disease? Allthe while carrying comparable viral loads | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A can spread it B is 4-5 times more likely to spread it. A may catch it and get Ill B is 4-5 times more likely to catch it and get Ill. A is extremely unlikely to need ICU care or die. B is 4-5 times more likely to need ICU care or die. Can you give the actual data to support those 'facts' that you have put down please. I might be wrong but I think you're exaggerating the figures in your example Where has this 4 to 5 times more likely come from? " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A has no real idea about the product that’s being placed into their body B Has no real idea what A is putting in their body A has no idea about long term effects of the vaccine B. Has no idea about the long term effects of the vaccine but may not be so bothered. A. May well have had covid but still decided to get vaccinated so they can go on holiday B Was not effected by offers of holidays beer free football tickets and stayed true to their belief and bought a camper van and found it fun A. Don’t mind about papers please environment because it’s for the greater good, B can see the future impact of potential digital control We need both A and B so C can happen and so we can have places like fab
A has their story
B has theirs
Accept each other story move along be happy were all still here and stop being dicks about it"Absolutely spot on however you are competing with bots and they just don't give up. | |||
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) | |||
"There is a wealth of experiance and knowledge on here… wonder why the experts are getting it all wrong. They should all join fabs and educate themselves a bit in here "Absolutely. The experts spend a lifetime researching these things yet a day on fab and they'd be more knowledgeable. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I despair listening to all these comments, look Covid vaccines are new but they work. If you are not happy that there is not enough evidence then speak to your doctor. In the meantime consider all the other vaccinations you have had in your lifetime , particularly tetanus, which have saved your life. In the meantime ponder this https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-01315-9 Yes , as a species we did once all live in a time without vaccines and antibiotics but our life expectancy was about 50 years It’s not a time to regress, Let’s progress. " Progress to what ? Curious? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I despair listening to all these comments, look Covid vaccines are new but they work. If you are not happy that there is not enough evidence then speak to your doctor. In the meantime consider all the other vaccinations you have had in your lifetime , particularly tetanus, which have saved your life. In the meantime ponder this https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-01315-9 Yes , as a species we did once all live in a time without vaccines and antibiotics but our life expectancy was about 50 years It’s not a time to regress, Let’s progress. Progress to what ? Curious? " i`ve only just seen this comedy, hehe fab does have the best comedians i`ll admit that
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A is not a gambler. B likes to have a wee flutter." Sorry A is the gambler here | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A is not a gambler. B likes to have a wee flutter. Sorry A is the gambler here " They are both gambler as neither is risk free. But going by odds B is more riskier gamble. All the statistics back this up. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A is not a gambler. B likes to have a wee flutter. Sorry A is the gambler here They are both gambler as neither is risk free. But going by odds B is more riskier gamble. All the statistics back this up." Which statistics are you talking because I don't see all the statistics backing this up from my view point... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Where in all this are the ones claiming to be immune " That would be ME. Only one in the house that hasn't caught it yet, all others have caught it twice, and yet I'm the only unvaccinated in the house, AND we all still mixed in the house. Go figure. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Where in all this are the ones claiming to be immune That would be ME. Only one in the house that hasn't caught it yet, all others have caught it twice, and yet I'm the only unvaccinated in the house, AND we all still mixed in the house. Go figure. "I'm betting the jabbed ones only caught it after being jabbed? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Where in all this are the ones claiming to be immune That would be ME. Only one in the house that hasn't caught it yet, all others have caught it twice, and yet I'm the only unvaccinated in the house, AND we all still mixed in the house. Go figure.
I'm betting the jabbed ones only caught it after being jabbed? "Says the man with the utterly pointless disclaimer on his profile…. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Where in all this are the ones claiming to be immune That would be ME. Only one in the house that hasn't caught it yet, all others have caught it twice, and yet I'm the only unvaccinated in the house, AND we all still mixed in the house. Go figure.
I'm betting the jabbed ones only caught it after being jabbed? "kinda get where your coming from , i heard people getting a really bad cold after the flue jab. i'm unvaccinated , never been ill or poorly, worked out of a busy yard all the way through...if they fib over parties what else have they fibbed about to pursuade you to get jabbed | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. There is no conclusive information. There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating
Less chance of becoming seriously ill by having a vaccine, there are no guarantees in this life!!
Except that we will all die one day
Less chance?
Risk of developing myocarditis the day after having 1st pfizer vaccination (as happend to a familly member) and confirmed by hospital staff when he had chest pains and went in for a checkup. Age 32."Caused by virus's | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, I'm not suggesting we all have a fight because the unvaccinated would just punch the vaccinated in the arm and it would all be over. Consider this though. Person A is vaccinated, person B is unvaccinated. Both A&B can spread. A might get ill. B might get ill. There's more chance of A infecting B than vice versa. A choose to get vaccinated. B choose not to (or couldn't for some reason). Person A was correct. They chose to act on what they believed to be good information. Person B was correct. They choose not to act on what they believed to be bad information. There is no conclusive information. There. Hope that clears things up and we can get on with masturbating rather than mass debating "B dies A inherits the earth | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A is not a gambler. B likes to have a wee flutter. Sorry A is the gambler here They are both gambler as neither is risk free. But going by odds B is more riskier gamble. All the statistics back this up." A has definitely took the bigger gamble here | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I didn't realise this thread was still a thing! I sort of hoped everyone would have realised that the point of it was to suggest that arguing about something that's a personal choice is meaningless
" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I didn't realise this thread was still a thing! I sort of hoped everyone would have realised that the point of it was to suggest that arguing about something that's a personal choice is meaningless
"Personal choice has knock on effects. The way society has rebranded public health as just about the individual will, I suspect, cost us dearly in the long run. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
