Vaccination efficacy - ask a stupid question...

[fon]

Thank you all for your responses so far. Much appreciated.

you're welcome you should read them.

The legal basis for domestic vaccination passports therefore looks shaky, I would suggest.

You'll be disappointed there. It looks rock solid to me.We'll need to tell the vaccinated apart from the unvaccinated, so we can keep the unvaccinated out, if that's what we want.

[bradw4]

1) it's a two pronged answer, since it's a question with two rooms.
a)You would not be more more likely to contract Covid-19 if you chose the vaccinated room.
b) You may be more more likely to contract Covid-19 if you chose the unvaccinated room.

Why?

In order to prove b, would you not require some evidence that the vaccines reduce transmission?

Do we know whether the vaccines make the vaccinated less likely to be carriers than the unvaccinated?

The only thing the government seems willing to assert is that the vaccines diminish the likelihood of serious illness.

[bradw4]

Good questions Bradwa4, I am going to post them on my Facebook and see what I get!

I like your post bradw4..I am going to nick that and pose that question to people..

Thank you both for posing these questions on other platforms. Please update this thread with any insightful answers you receive.

I'm genuinely interested in what the scientific theory, and evidence, would indicate.

These aren't loaded questions, either. If experts says that a room full of vaccinated people is safer than a room full of unvaccinated people due to a lower risk of transmission, I won't argue the contrary just because I oppose lockdowns and vaccination passports.

[fon]

Thank you all for your responses so far. Much appreciated.

Thanks bradw4,
I just want to add the following. A fundamental feature of the vaccination programme is the ability to discriminate who has been vaccinated from those have not been vaccinated.
Without that the foundations of the programme are undermined. It must be possible to show who is vaccinated from who is not, since many reasons for doing it depend on that. That's how it is. Good luck to you but we will know who is vaccinated, and who is not.It's just how it is.

[jmc]

3) None whatsoever. Its purely political theater for media consumption.

You exhibit a basic but common misunderstanding. As far as we know, Nature does not miss any event.

In layman's terms, of course, if you cannot detect or measure the event it is as it it never happened, but nature misses no events.Nature sees and weighs everything. What you say is a basic simplification, which you use to forward your own politics, which is a true irony.

Here's a thought to crush any hope you have that that you might be right! One single undetectable event converted this molecule from a lump of snot into the Corona virus.

What does that even mean. It reads like a word salad of incomprehensible non sequiturs.

Have you been hitting the bottle early tonight? A Grupo Modelo product perhaps. Somewhat suitable given the subject.

Or started mixing benylin with hard cider? Again.

[miahoneybee]

jmc that made me laugh out loud

[miahoneybee]

I watched a video ..a woman from who " transmission from an asymptomatic person is very rare". I will try and post it but might not find the link or to big to post..

[bradw4]

Thanks bradw4,
I just want to add the following. A fundamental feature of the vaccination programme is the ability to discriminate who has been vaccinated from those have not been vaccinated.

That's fair comment. I don't doubt that the government will endeavour to track who has and has not been vaccinated, even if it can't get away with introducing domestic vaccination passports. Big Brother always finds a way.

The reason I keep banging on about the spectre of Covid passports is that it's utterly totalitarian. It is the only fitting description.

The thought of having to comply with officious demands to see meine Papiere whenever I leave the house to go anywhere or do anything offends my moral sense. I'm not the only one feeling that way.

In spite of my paranoia, I suspect the pro-passport lobby are facing a considerable uphill battle.

First, There will be millions of people who won't or cannot get the vaccination. Many will be BAME, pregnant, or disabled. It's an anti-discrimination lawyer's wet dream. Lawsuits will avalanche down on the legal system. Businesses guilty of discriminating against the unvaccinated will toxify their public image.

Second, most young people (say under 30) will not receive a vaccination invitation until the second half of the year at the earliest. And if a restaurant can't admit unvaccinated people as patrons, it can't very well allow them to work in the same environment as vaccinated patrons.

Which means millions of young people would end up barred from accessing, and working for, passport-dependent services. Effectively shut out of society until further notice.

Even the cruelty of the government's scientific advisors has its limits. One would hope.

[fon]

1) it's a two pronged answer, since it's a question with two rooms.
a)You would not be more more likely to contract Covid-19 if you chose the vaccinated room.
b) You may be more more likely to contract Covid-19 if you chose the unvaccinated room.

In order to prove b, would you not require some evidence that the vaccines reduce transmission?

Look, I have literally not got much time to live, so I'll be as brief as possible!
wrt part b, May is the modal verb expressing possibility, and you will realise that a possibility has two or more outcomes. Now it either is or is not the case that you are more likely to contract Covid-19 if you chose the unvaccinated room. Either way, part b is logically proven. It is hence a true scientific statement.


I'm sorry if you don't get it, only a subset of humanity grasps pure boolean logic , they are mostly linguists or programmers(like me ) or lawyers, I guess you skipped those lectures? Too bad, but good luck and very best wishes in whatever you do.

[fon]

What does that even mean. It reads like a word salad of incomprehensible non sequiturs.

I'm so very sorry, I briefly though you might be bright.