The coronabrexit thread. I mean, coronavirus thread

[maxjam]

18 minutes ago, Crewton said:

Well, it's a moot point. If vaccines do protect individuals from becoming infected (and I would contend that that was certainly the case when the vaccines based on the Wuhan virus were first distributed) then they also indirectly prevent transmission because they reduced the 'R' number (until the Government took the brakes off just as the Delta Variant was getting established here).

I didn't bother with the Fox News report, but your second link is an article based on a study reported in the Lancet, from which I will quote the following findings and conclusions:

and

and

I'm happy to let the science do the talking. I have emphasised the point about close, prolonged exposure, because it emphasises what is a known fact : that viral load is fundamental to the successful transmission of all of the Covid variants.

I've been through this study before...  It talks about Delta, we're several mutations into Omicron now.

The difference between the vaccinated and unvaccinated was 13% - or in the real world, as per The Guardian article, in a family setting you are just as likely to catch/transmit covid regardless of vaccination status.

Is prolonged exposure at home any different to prolonged exposure at work or anywhere else?  Such as the cruises mentioned previously or at the football?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/20/9000-covid-cases-linked-to-euro-2020-games-in-mass-events-scheme

One of the best ways to look at the effectiveness of vaccines against transmission is Australia - praised for their harsh lockdowns and low death rates but since they have opened back up following their mass vaccination programme (approx 97% double jabbed, 70% boosted) cases have skyrocketed. 

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/may/18/why-are-australias-covid-case-rates-still-so-high-and-how-can-we-prevent-more-deaths

https://www.health.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/covid-19-vaccines/numbers-statistics

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/australia/

*I guessed some people wouldn't click on the Fox report - it contained a video interview with Dr Fauci who stated that the vaccines weren't very good at preventing transmission.  I tried to find similar on CNN etc but struggled, so posted a related Guardian article.  One of the most unfortunate things to come out of the pandemic (apart from the obvious) has been the politicization of it ?

 

 

 

[Crewton]

14 minutes ago, Archied said:

So fake news / misinformation is ok as long as it’s on the right side ,,, tell that to some people who have died and been harmed from the vaccine and yes there are some as official death certificate s and paltry offers of compensation from the government prove ,

people Have the right to true information to make choices that can be life or death for them , they’re loved ones , they’re children 

Yes, people have a right to receive factual information, and sometimes that hasn't happened. There's a risk in most medical procedures and treatments - tiny in some cases, large in others, much in between. No-one knows exactly how much risk until you start applying them to real people. Every such death is a tragedy, but the alternative of 'letting nature take it's course' or 'trusting your immune system' carries far greater risks in most cases of serious illness.

[Crewton]

9 minutes ago, maxjam said:

The difference between the vaccinated and unvaccinated was 13%

It's 52% - 38% compared to 25%.

[Stive Pesley]

2 hours ago, maxjam said:

Vaccines haven't weakened covid.  The CDC states that vaccines don't effect viruses

That wasn't what I was implying, so you've taken the wrong end of the stick there

To speak a bit slower - even you are accepting of the fact that the vaccines were proven in trials to lessen the likelihood of transmission, at least in the short term.

And they were also shown to lessen the severity and length of the disease (which you also admit above)

So the mass vaccination program slowed the virus down (because a proportion of those recently jabbed avoided transmission), and it also made symptoms milder (less coughing = less transmission vector) because it primed our immune systems - and now we're at a stage where we can all go about our business without masks (which is all we ever wanted) knowing that our immune systems are much more able to cope with an endemic virus as it circulates

If the messaging on the vaccine program had been done by you (ie "it doesn't prevent transmission, what's the point you dummies") then we wouldn't be where we are now

That's all I'm saying - it's not hard, but I guess you'll not let it drop ?

 

[maxjam]

7 minutes ago, Crewton said:

It's 52% - 38% compared to 25%.

You'll have to run that by me...

'The results suggest even those who are fully vaccinated have a sizeable risk of becoming infected, with analysis revealing a fully vaccinated contact has a 25% chance of catching the virus from an infected household member while an unvaccinated contact has a 38% chance of becoming infected.'

I guess if you wanted you could argue that 38% is approx 150% more than 25% if you wanted, but the fact remains that regardless of percentage in a real world setting 'People who are fully vaccinated against Covid yet catch the virus are just as infectious to others in their household as infected unvaccinated people, research suggests.'

[Crewton]

6 minutes ago, maxjam said:

You'll have to run that by me...

'The results suggest even those who are fully vaccinated have a sizeable risk of becoming infected, with analysis revealing a fully vaccinated contact has a 25% chance of catching the virus from an infected household member while an unvaccinated contact has a 38% chance of becoming infected.'

I guess if you wanted you could argue that 38% is approx 150% more than 25% if you wanted, but the fact remains that regardless of percentage in a real world setting 'People who are fully vaccinated against Covid yet catch the virus are just as infectious to others in their household as infected unvaccinated people, research suggests.'

Unvaccinated have a 52% higher chance of infection than vaccinated. Being just as infectious clearly doesn't translate into just as many transmissions, ipso facto vaccination appears to reduce the rate of transmission.

[maxjam]

1 minute ago, Stive Pesley said:

That wasn't what I was implying, so you've taken the wrong end of the stick there

To speak a bit slower - even you are accepting of the fact that the vaccines were proven in trials to lessen the likelihood of transmission, at least in the short term.

And they were also shown to lessen the severity and length of the disease (which you also admit above)

So the mass vaccination program slowed the virus down (because a proportion of those recently jabbed avoided transmission), and it also made symptoms milder (less coughing = less transmission vector) because it primed our immune systems - and now we're at a stage where we can all go about our business without masks (which is all we ever wanted) knowing that our immune systems are much more able to cope with an endemic virus as it circulates

If the messaging on the vaccine program had been done by you (ie "it doesn't prevent transmission, what's the point you dummies") then we wouldn't be where we are now

That's all I'm saying - it's not hard, but I guess you'll not let it drop ?

 

Well if you spoke clearer we may have understood what you were trying to say.  At least you were right in me not letting it drop ?

Debating 25% here and 38% there isn't real world data - it assumes a fixed and unchanging point in a persons life.  In reality assuming you only ever mix with vaccinated people you still don't know how long ago they had their vaccine nor how effective it was for them.  Given the sheer volume of infections this year both here in the UK and Australia (as I linked previously) it is clear to see that any reduction in transmission has been minimal at best.

I am happy to agree that the vaccines have reduced transmission but by how much is highly debatable and as stated by the Director of the CDC, overstated.

The messaging I would have give would have been very simple... 'Don't wanna die from covid?  Get the jab ?'

[Archied]

1 hour ago, Crewton said:

Yes, people have a right to receive factual information, and sometimes that hasn't happened. There's a risk in most medical procedures and treatments - tiny in some cases, large in others, much in between. No-one knows exactly how much risk until you start applying them to real people. Every such death is a tragedy, but the alternative of 'letting nature take it's course' or 'trusting your immune system' carries far greater risks in most cases of serious illness.

Fake news / misinformation is wrong , are you saying that lying to people is ok as you believe the alternative to them choosing not to take the vaccine in your opinion is worse ? 

[Archied]

1 hour ago, Stive Pesley said:

That wasn't what I was implying, so you've taken the wrong end of the stick there

To speak a bit slower - even you are accepting of the fact that the vaccines were proven in trials to lessen the likelihood of transmission, at least in the short term.

And they were also shown to lessen the severity and length of the disease (which you also admit above)

So the mass vaccination program slowed the virus down (because a proportion of those recently jabbed avoided transmission), and it also made symptoms milder (less coughing = less transmission vector) because it primed our immune systems - and now we're at a stage where we can all go about our business without masks (which is all we ever wanted) knowing that our immune systems are much more able to cope with an endemic virus as it circulates

If the messaging on the vaccine program had been done by you (ie "it doesn't prevent transmission, what's the point you dummies") then we wouldn't be where we are now

That's all I'm saying - it's not hard, but I guess you'll not let it drop ?

 

From day one there has had to be a rowing back on the claims on the effectiveness of the vaccine , forced by real world data , 

and I’m sure by the same token vaccine deaths and harms will increase over time too ( if investigated and reported properly ) 

will it turn out the pros will outweigh the cons , let’s wait and see but one thing is for sure it’s already for from what was sold to the masses

[maxjam]

4 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

None of them said it was impossible to catch the virus. Using "Stop" and "prevent" and "protect" can be used carelessly in soundbites but the vaccine advice has been clear in the UK.    

Aaaaand as luck would have it... breaking news Pfizer CEO has covid

The original post stating 100% effective is still up (I just checked).  What were you saying about misinformation being allowed if its for the right side @Archied

[PistoldPete]

5 minutes ago, Archied said:

From day one there has had to be a rowing back on the claims on the effectiveness of the vaccine , forced by real world data , 

and I’m sure by the same token vaccine deaths and harms will increase over time too ( if investigated and reported properly ) 

will it turn out the pros will outweigh the cons , let’s wait and see but one thing is for sure it’s already for from what was sold to the masses

No it isn't rowing back. That is how it works.. vaccines are initially very effective against the strains they are designed for , but further mutations of the virus mean that the vaccine becomes less effective. And it becomes less effective anyway as the effects wear off over time. No different with the flu jab which many people take every year. 

[Archied]

50 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Aaaaand as luck would have it... breaking news Pfizer CEO has covid

The original post stating 100% effective is still up (I just checked).  What were you saying about misinformation being allowed if its for the right side @Archied

Is paxlovid another of his companies products ?

[Archied]

53 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

No it isn't rowing back. That is how it works.. vaccines are initially very effective against the strains they are designed for , but further mutations of the virus mean that the vaccine becomes less effective. And it becomes less effective anyway as the effects wear off over time. No different with the flu jab which many people take every year. 

You keep pumping it on you if it floats your boat 

[Archied]

4 minutes ago, Archied said:

Is paxlovid another of his companies products ?

Just googled it and yes it is

[Crewton]

1 hour ago, Archied said:

Fake news / misinformation is wrong , are you saying that lying to people is ok as you believe the alternative to them choosing not to take the vaccine in your opinion is worse ? 

No. In fact it's PFO that I'm not saying that.

If you want an example where people were lied to and it cost them their lives, I'll offer the cases of women who were told by cranks on the Internet that having the vaccine would harm their unborn child and so wouldn't have a vaccine. Some of them subsequently died after contracting Covid. 

As it is, no-one ever said that having a vaccine carried zero risk to health, but plenty of crackpot claims were made about what the vaccines would do to recipients. Those people are lucky they aren't serving jail sentences. 

[Archied]

8 minutes ago, Crewton said:

No. In fact it's PFO that I'm not saying that.

If you want an example where people were lied to and it cost them their lives, I'll offer the cases of women who were told by cranks on the Internet that having the vaccine would harm their unborn child and so wouldn't have a vaccine. Some of them subsequently died after contracting Covid. 

As it is, no-one ever said that having a vaccine carried zero risk to health, but plenty of crackpot claims were made about what the vaccines would do to recipients. Those people are lucky they aren't serving jail sentences. 

Ahhh I see , NO ONE who has had the covid jabs have died from covid , silly me noticing that even before vaccines there was no rhyme or reason or any understanding of why a very very small percentage of people died from or were seriously harmed by covid and the vast majority ranged from no symptoms to bad flu like illness,,,, now if any of these experts could get a handle on the reasons for that I would be very impressed ,

I take it you are a very learned doctor being able to know they wouldn’t have died if they had the vaccine , my friend had a stroke often his booster , another had a heart attack ,on your logic I can say they wouldn’t have had these issues without the vaccine ,,,,, you see things have to be even handed to have any value

Edited August 15, 2022 by Archied

[maxjam]

21 minutes ago, Archied said:

Is paxlovid another of his companies products ?

yup

[Archied]

Just now, maxjam said:

yup

Good to see he gives it a plug , I will be rushing out to stock up

[Gone]

For all the smart arses not only what you wanted has killed the economy and caused a cost of living crisis, now this. Bravo 

 

[maxjam]

29 minutes ago, TexasRam said:

For all the smart arses not only what you wanted has killed the economy and caused a cost of living crisis, now this. Bravo 

 

Excess deaths (in all age brackets) have been running at over 1000 per week for more than 3 months now with no signs of slowing and barely a mention in the media - and that has been throughout the summer when typically deaths are lower.