Vaccination

Splatt
Posts: 1454
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:46 am

Re: Vaccination

Post by Splatt »

Fingal wrote: Sun Feb 28, 2021 11:12 am First thing, above all this government hates the lockdown and can't wait to end it.
Can't see anything to suggest thats true now.

The government is *terrified* to release lockdown "just in case" it comes back. It too scared to act at all now.

The prospect of a resurgence, no matter how unlikely, has terrified them to the point they wont be comfortable ever releasing.

They've given up on the economy. Its unfixable at this point. It'll be someone elses problem later on.
Secondly, there is almost no reason at all for them not to push for the highest possible vaccination rate possible. I can't imagine that any government would go for the max. To portray this as unnecessary political overshoot is bizarre. There's just no downside to it.
Plenty of downsides.

Firstly its against basic, established public health policy. You don't vaccinate people unlikely to get affected by a disease. Firstly its pointless, secondly you increase the chances of a rare reaction injuring or killing someone.

Theres an age-related cutoff point where the risk to the individual is greater than the risk from covid. qCovid shows that clearly. Once you hit roughly that 1 in 90,000 level the relative risks reverse.
Morally and ethically compelling or coercing people to take that risk for no reason is problematic and undesirable as well from a basic public health standpoint.

Above that there's also the basic fact is its pointless. Attempting to protect people from a disease they're already not at risk from.
Its as mad as vaccinating already confirmed covid cases right now.

Fingal
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2021 5:11 pm

Re: Vaccination

Post by Fingal »

jmc wrote: Sun Feb 28, 2021 12:05 pm
There is absolutely no public health reason for 90% vaccination rate. None. Around 50% is the correct number. And given the very high adverse reaction death rate among old people there are very good reasons for vaccinating the bare minimum needed to achieve endemic equilibrium.
Fine, but plenty of people disagree with you so that's a moot point. What matters for policy is what the government believes.

Contrary to what is constantly argued on this website, this government hates the lockdown in principle. But they've been convinced it's necessary. Again, I'm not looking for debate on the facts, I'm saying this is what they believe.

The consensus view (outside lockdown sceptics) is that Boris relaxed restrictions too far and too fast in the past, thus allowing the virus to get hold again. He now considers that the worst political outcome of all would be to make that same mistake yet again. This isn't about kicking the can down the road. It's about avoiding what would be a fatal blow to his credibility.

Above all, he's desperate to make sure we're on a 'one way road' to relaxed rules.

You can argue he's got the science wrong if you want. But as far as the politics go, you and this website in general are substantially misreading things.

thinksaboutit
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2021 11:38 am

Re: Vaccination

Post by thinksaboutit »

Splatt wrote: Sun Feb 28, 2021 12:14 pm
klondike wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 8:46 pm As it happens short term I had completely zero reaction to it. Not even any visible redness. I do vt know if any conclusion could be made from that but I would err towards me having at least some prior exposure to similar coronavirus strains and my immune system getting shot of the pathogen without even breaking into a sweat.
It doesn't really mean anything. ZOE data shows that people who have had covid experience roughly twice the chance of side effects than those that did not [1].
That's pretty normal - prior exposure can usually trigger a more severe response.

Your reaction or not to a jab says pretty much nothing about protection, effectiveness or anything else.

Anecdotally here, i know quite a few that had Pfizer with little/no issue after dose 1 but pretty bad after dose 2 (fever to the point of hallucinating etc).

Everyone i know that's had Oxford has had some issues after dose 1 ranging from sore arm/itching to fairly common extreme fatigue, headaches, nausea.
I don't know anyone that's had dose 2 yet.


[1] https://covid.joinzoe.com/post/covid-va ... acy-safety
How does the ZOE study estimate and compensate for selection bias?
It seems plausible that people with a reaction may be more motivated to record their experience.

thinksaboutit
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2021 11:38 am

Re: Vaccination

Post by thinksaboutit »

Fingal wrote: Sun Feb 28, 2021 4:33 pm
jmc wrote: Sun Feb 28, 2021 12:05 pm
There is absolutely no public health reason for 90% vaccination rate. None. Around 50% is the correct number. And given the very high adverse reaction death rate among old people there are very good reasons for vaccinating the bare minimum needed to achieve endemic equilibrium.
Fine, but plenty of people disagree with you so that's a moot point. What matters for policy is what the government believes.

Contrary to what is constantly argued on this website, this government hates the lockdown in principle. But they've been convinced it's necessary. Again, I'm not looking for debate on the facts, I'm saying this is what they believe.

The consensus view (outside lockdown sceptics) is that Boris relaxed restrictions too far and too fast in the past, thus allowing the virus to get hold again. He now considers that the worst political outcome of all would be to make that same mistake yet again. This isn't about kicking the can down the road. It's about avoiding what would be a fatal blow to his credibility.

Above all, he's desperate to make sure we're on a 'one way road' to relaxed rules.

You can argue he's got the science wrong if you want. But as far as the politics go, you and this website in general are substantially misreading things.
The extreme interpretation from a political point of view does have the effect of eclipsing the rest of the argument.

miahoneybee
Posts: 1290
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:26 pm

Re: Vaccination

Post by miahoneybee »

Jockcovidiot I absolutely agree with your posts. All this bullshit has been is about the endgame..smokescreen for what's really going on behind the scenes..more and more people have been waking up but who knows if enough are to stop the endgame..furlough as an example is just to shut the masses up while plans behind the scenes are put in place ( one goal bring vaccinate everyone) . When the plans are not going as quickly as planned another smoke screen is added and furlough continues. Follow the money and look deeper. All governments doing the same thing is no coincidence..
I liked something Putin said on national TV.i hope hes right..
:)

StPiosCafe
Posts: 142
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2021 1:00 pm

Re: Vaccination

Post by StPiosCafe »

jmc wrote: Sun Feb 28, 2021 12:05 pm There is absolutely no public health reason for 90% vaccination rate. None. Around 50% is the correct number. And given the very high adverse reaction death rate among old people there are very good reasons for vaccinating the bare minimum needed to achieve endemic equilibrium.
Too late for any of that talk. All the old people have already been vaccinated, may as well press on now since R0 is much more than 1.5, it's more like 4. If it were 1.5 we would already have reached herd immunity, since 35 million Britons have already either had the vaccine or the disease, i.e. 50%++, herd immunity has not occurred yet, hence R0 higher than 3.
Fingal wrote: Sun Feb 28, 2021 4:33 pm Above all, he's desperate to make sure we're on a 'one way road' to relaxed rules.You can argue he's got the science wrong if you want. But as far as the politics go, you and this website in general are substantially misreading things.
Of course the Tories want to quit lockdown ASAP, they are the party of economic competence, if nothing else.

The trouble is, an idea has taken root here that the government has some secret agenda, that nobody here can explain. And this agenda involves some powerful secret reason that makes the government quite enjoy inflicting the pain of lockdown on itself and the public. The idea is a load of tripe.

Splatt
Posts: 1454
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:46 am

Re: Vaccination

Post by Splatt »

thinksaboutit wrote: Sun Feb 28, 2021 5:20 pm How does the ZOE study estimate and compensate for selection bias?
It seems plausible that people with a reaction may be more motivated to record their experience.
Methodology is fully on their site.
Yes there's potential selection bias but the data for this and everything else is well inline with the MHRA and CDC data showing the same.

All the data from different independent sources globally are roughly in agreement with side effect frequency and severity.

(That and in europe the number of health care workers off work sick at the same time after the AZ jab causing havoc).

User avatar
JockCovidiot
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2021 11:20 am

Re: Vaccination

Post by JockCovidiot »

Fingal wrote: Sun Feb 28, 2021 4:33 pm
jmc wrote: Sun Feb 28, 2021 12:05 pm
There is absolutely no public health reason for 90% vaccination rate. None. Around 50% is the correct number. And given the very high adverse reaction death rate among old people there are very good reasons for vaccinating the bare minimum needed to achieve endemic equilibrium.
Fine, but plenty of people disagree with you so that's a moot point. What matters for policy is what the government believes.

Contrary to what is constantly argued on this website, this government hates the lockdown in principle. But they've been convinced it's necessary. Again, I'm not looking for debate on the facts, I'm saying this is what they believe.

The consensus view (outside lockdown sceptics) is that Boris relaxed restrictions too far and too fast in the past, thus allowing the virus to get hold again. He now considers that the worst political outcome of all would be to make that same mistake yet again. This isn't about kicking the can down the road. It's about avoiding what would be a fatal blow to his credibility.

Above all, he's desperate to make sure we're on a 'one way road' to relaxed rules.

You can argue he's got the science wrong if you want. But as far as the politics go, you and this website in general are substantially misreading things.
Utter rubbsh!

The Gov LOVES lockdowns and the power it grants them over every aspect of peoples lives.

If it was only about Johnson having a political out the same thing would not be happening the world over! Besides all any politician would need to do is dial in the media scare machine stop enforcing "the rules" whilst keeping them in place then just blame the public.

Covid presented world leaders with a UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY as they themselves have admitted on numerous occassions. As apparently said by Winston Churchill "Never let a good crisis go to waste."

miahoneybee
Posts: 1290
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:26 pm

Re: Vaccination

Post by miahoneybee »

Mmm 14 months in and still in lockdown with a few carrots dangled. What part of tripe is that? The deaths alone caused by this bullshit clearly tells you the governments handling of this has been an utter disaster but yet you still think its incompetence and now to save face they must continue with this farce...the evidence for anything but incompetence is staring you in the face. Try and look outside of me me me and think outside of your little bubble..open your eyes and wake up...this is far beyond the realms of incompetence in my opinion.they had the power to take away our freedom and liberties and have the power to give it back but they dont want to . The only way to get it back is to take it back
I rest my case..

Fingal
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2021 5:11 pm

Re: Vaccination

Post by Fingal »

JockCovidiot wrote: Sun Feb 28, 2021 6:27 pm
The Gov LOVES lockdowns and the power it grants them over every aspect of peoples lives. ..If it was only about Johnson having a political out the same thing would not be happening the world over!...Covid presented world leaders with a UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY as they themselves have admitted on numerous occassions.
You're right to point out that lockdowns are hardly unique to the UK - but you draw the wrong conclusion. What you should see is that it's absurd to reach for a conspiratorial explanation - because you need to extend it to so many countries at once. What - are they all in league with each other??!

This is very far out on the conspiracy theory extreme.

Post Reply