Why vaccinate people under 50 years of age?

Treatments and their effectiveness, herd immunity, masks, testing, etc.
Fudge
Posts: 81
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2020 10:42 am

Re: Why vaccinate people under 50 years of age?

Post by Fudge »

Well said Speedstick.
How can those vaccinated be harmed by those that aren’t? Any attempt at trying to justify that any form of threat exists from someone who doesn’t roll the sleeve makes a complete mockery of the so called efficacy of the vaccination itself. How is this not obvious?
With each day the pendulum shifts further away from the deluded ideological moralistic worshiping of Covid, project fear and The Lectern and as I eluded in an earlier post, those (i must state not all, but absolutely the self righteous individuals who expect or insist on total compliance and subjugation at the expense of self respect, bodily integrity and a small matter of Human Rights law) who are vaxxed will soon have no where to hide, absolutely no excuses to cower, to keep projecting their fear onto others and then expecting ‘us’ to compromise ourselves again and again for them; instead they’ll have to stand up and be counted. If they’re still scared then stay at home and contemplate the meaning and purpose of life. Like Speedstick, my business has gone, 3 years retraining at University and 12 years growing a successful business which is now down the pan forcing me to sell my house. I’m incendiary angry, but in a very focussed way and I will not hesitate to hold people accountable. Clocks ticking, tick tock...

Fingal
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2021 5:11 pm

Re: Why vaccinate people under 50 years of age?

Post by Fingal »

Splatt wrote: Mon Mar 01, 2021 4:12 pm
Fingal wrote: Mon Mar 01, 2021 10:22 am
Splatt wrote: Mon Feb 15, 2021 12:16 pm You could just as easily argue the opposite. The more infections you have, the more chance you have for new mutations. So there's a case for reducing overall infections to the lowest level possible, whether or not those people are in high risk groups.
Not really, we aren't using sterilising vaccines so unless you want "case control restrictions" literally forever more you need to get out of that mindset.
Nothing ever opens up again (cases rise), test and trace remains forever, travel is permanently curtailed, normal life never resumes.

Worth noting the best guess for the B.1.1.7 emergence was from an immunocompromised patient not just "weight of infections".

In the next 1-2 months we'll be creating absolutely ideal conditions for immune-escape mutants regardless of cases.
I know - but the more cases you have, the more chance this will happen.

Also, it means that we're going to get problematic new variants anyway - with or without a vaccine.

Again, it's perfectly possible that the best tactic will turn out to be minimises the overall caseload while we still can. It's much easier to track and trace dangerous new variants in time if your overall caseload is a few thousand. Whereas, right now any mutation gets lost in the noise for awhile.

According to a report in today's FT online, the Manaus variant is infecting even people with natural immunity from past infection.

Herd immunity - an old favourite on this website - appears to be failing.

I'm not saying any of this is definitive yet, it's all in the balance. But personally, if I were a betting man, I'd put my money on the vaccine route.

Splatt
Posts: 1522
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:46 am

Re: Why vaccinate people under 50 years of age?

Post by Splatt »

So again you're arguing for literal never ending restrictions and a focus on case management until the end of time for a virus that very shortly will be a non-issue for almost anyone that gets it.

We've never in history treated a disease with a constant, never ending fixation on cases.

Tracking variants to an extent gets easier with more cases as trends emerge more rapidly in the data but thats an aside.

Also, ignore the FT. The article is nonsense. It was based on "Manaus had about 75% sero positive and some people got re-infected therefore end of world".
The numbers are still low, as they are for the SA variant (same mutation) and others. Yes it happens but its low and ultimately in just about call cases the repeat is asymptomatic or less severe than the original.
Its natural and this is what many diseases do over time.

Herd immunity via natural infection was the way out and remains the only way out.
Not sure how you ever hope to hit a HIT with a majority vaccine thats only 59% effective at preventing infection and 0% against newer variants?
Pfizer we'd get closer (but still not make it due to kids being a potential reservoir). With a majority of people getting AZ its impossible.

PHEs own study suggests 83-99% protection against reinfection from natural infection. (94% against symptomatic infection)
Compared to 90% or so Pfizer and about 60% from AZ.

Natural HI is the only way out.

Within the next year we'll have a large chunk of the world running around partially vaccinated against 10s of thousands of starting variants.
Escape mutants are a 100% certainty in that situation and always will be. There is absolutely no way they can be avoided.
The amazing thing so far is despite a quarter of a billion cases, how little reinfection there is. This virus really does not mutate much or rapidly at all.
A standard coronavirus you'd have expected rates 100s of times what we see.

Speedstick
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2020 8:27 pm

Re: Why vaccinate people under 50 years of age?

Post by Speedstick »

I am truly sorry to hear about your business Fudge, l empathize entirely.
Yes like you l will not stop until those responsible are held to account and bought to justice for these crimes against humanity, including their backers and collaborators, who unfortunately even operate on this site, and try to justify all this utter in humanity and insanity.
Have you also noticed how the behavioural insights team have primarily targeted children and low paid unskilled workers in this saga, i.e. those with little or no voice to complain.
However please try not to feel too incendiary Fudge, that is part of their plan Fudge to make you and I look like the crazed and manical ones, whereas of course it is the followers of this insane Covid Fundamentalist sect who are the crazed ones.

Spycatcher
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2020 10:18 am

Re: Why vaccinate people under 50 years of age?

Post by Spycatcher »

thinksaboutit wrote: Thu Feb 04, 2021 5:47 pm There are some who say I'm not at risk, so why vaccinate people like me.

To me, the reason is:

1. To get the population to high levels of immunity quicker than would happen through natural infection/recovery.

2. To reduce the risk of a new peak and restrictions next winter.

3. Infect and kill less people in the meantime.

What is wrong with this reasoning?
No, no and no.

This is completely the wrong approach.

Our immune system is more than capable of dealing with this without experimental interventions like vaccination with an untried and untested "vaccine".

miahoneybee
Posts: 1358
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:26 pm

Re: Why vaccinate people under 50 years of age?

Post by miahoneybee »

Spycatcher
There are many ls that agree with you but dont bother to engage with the 77th brigade on here as pointed out several times they are a mild irritant not worth time or effort. They are best ignored.
A great name as you are more than qualified with that name to spot them on here including the tiresome good cop bad cop splattered on here...
Interestingly enough do far I have come across 7 people who felt coerced into having an experimental vaccine and now regret it. I imagine there will be plenty of those.
The headlines today astra a now claiming the experimental vaccine stops 80% of over 80s needing to go into hospital. Mmm another change in the narrative. For many it was 100% as hospital was no longer needed anymore but a funeral director instead. Of course covid on the certificate or if after the vaccine natural course or something else and as the government and cronies have stopped post mortems for covid there is no way of knowing if it was a covid death. Very convenient including the push for cremations..
:evil:

thinksaboutit
Posts: 562
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2021 11:38 am

Re: Why vaccinate people under 50 years of age?

Post by thinksaboutit »

Splatt wrote: Tue Mar 02, 2021 12:37 am
PHEs own study suggests 83-99% protection against reinfection from natural infection. (94% against symptomatic infection)
Compared to 90% or so Pfizer and about 60% from AZ.
I haven't found this study. Can you add a link, please.

Splatt
Posts: 1522
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:46 am

Re: Why vaccinate people under 50 years of age?

Post by Splatt »

There are several.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101 ... 21249642v1

is one. Took roughly 5 seconds googling.

Also linked off .gov.uk dashboard. And referred to in BMJ.

lulukyriacou
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2020 5:37 pm

Re: Why vaccinate people under 50 years of age?

Post by lulukyriacou »

Splatt, That particular study is a Pre ptint and not peer reviewed. #justsaying

Splatt
Posts: 1522
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:46 am

Re: Why vaccinate people under 50 years of age?

Post by Splatt »

lulukyriacou wrote: Wed Mar 03, 2021 12:46 am Splatt, That particular study is a Pre ptint and not peer reviewed. #justsaying
Its a pre-print of an officially sanctioned study by PHE and used in its current form by UK gov to form policy.

Which if you'd read the follow on notes on the .gov release at all you'd have known.

(That and i guess the fact it agrees with the many many peer reviewed studies on the topic hints its highly unlikely to be inaccurate).
Data robust enough for Israel to base its vaccination policy on (not vaccinating previous cases first) and France with 1 jab instead of 2 for those.

Studies going back 12 months now showing similar outcomes.

Post Reply