Vaccination efficacy - ask a stupid question...

fon
Posts: 1172
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:47 pm

Re: Vaccination efficacy - ask a stupid question...

Post by fon »

bradw4 wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:23 pm
fon wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 9:21 pm 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 who have not been vaccinated.
That's a 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.
It's a basic feature, it's not big brother, we need to know to figure out if the vaccine works, so we need to know who has had it.
The reason I keep banging on about the spectre of Covid passports is that it's utterly totalitarian. It is the only fitting description.
It would be almost pointless to have any system without recording the facts about it. Look, is it totalitarian to record that you have passed your driving test or have English citizenship? If not, then your argument is shot down. Move on with your life and think more deeply, you have exposed enough for me to know that your ideas are superficial, become a hippy, live in a caravan in Wales, smoke dope and listen to Led Zep for a few years. Nothing matters, but it will later. There is no magic bullet, the bean counters will track you down and give you a council tax nill, welcome to the real world! We all love a Robin Hood, but he did not pay his council tax, you know!
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.
Yet you are content to reap the rewards of the system, would you mind if we erased your NI contributions so we can have your pension and distribute it amongst ourselves? I'd like that.
In spite of my paranoia, I suspect the pro-passport lobby is facing a considerable uphill battle.
It's already there in the system, my GP will write me a letter for £25.




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.

I agree with that approach, use common law and democracy, that is correct, and it is why the British system is correct. It is right to use law and democracy to reach the balance needed. It will take time, and it does not happen automatically. time is always required when things change, things always change. The law will always be behind and that is why it is right to campaign, protest and change it - that IS the magic bullet.

We are not here to defeat totalitarians we are here to turn totalitarians into Englishmen and Welshmen. And the other type of Britons.

Anne
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2020 6:10 pm

Re: Vaccination efficacy - ask a stupid question...

Post by Anne »

I recently spoke to a friend who'd had the jab. (We are similar ages,early 60s). Her doctor told her it would not prevent her getting or transmitting Covid 19 and would give her 89 percent chance of not becoming seriously ill -
this was after first dose. It was Pfizer.
In Sept. 2020 WHO says "most people with Covid 19 experience mild to moderate disease. Approximately 10-15% of cases progress to severe disease and about 5% become critically ill."

Therefore, as I understand it, without the 'vaccine' you have a chance between 85% to 90% of Not becoming severely ill.

Therefore I cannot see what is to be gained by having the vaccine, as your chances of becoming severely ill are no different, and you may be open to side effects/reactions.

Added to which, my NHS leaflet which has recently arrived states "We do not yet know whether it will stop you from catching and passing on the virus".

bradw4
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2021 4:23 pm

Re: Vaccination efficacy - ask a stupid question...

Post by bradw4 »

fon wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:47 pm 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.
You said, "You may be more more likely to contract Covid-19 if you chose the unvaccinated room."

I simply asked why that may be the case. A perfectly reasonable question.

As a law graduate (1st class), I'm used to basing my arguments on evidence. Assertions need to be based on more than just bluster. More than just because I said so. Your bizarre post to jmc being a case in point.

Hence the torrent of questions you patently find so tedious. (You know, you don't have to answer them.)

I understand boolean logic, and your point that a vaccinated room would be no less safe than an unvaccinated one.

I'm not contending that an unvaccinated room may be the safer option. Obviously, it wouldn't.

My question was simply why a vaccinated room may be safer if it has not yet been definitely established that the vaccine prevents transmission between people.

It's possible that I'm asking for evidence which has not yet been revealed. So the question itself is contentious.

In order to justify passports, the government needs to demonstrate that it is taking proportionate action. But then you find yourself in the realm of protected characteristics. The question of proportionality becomes central.

Please, don't get personal on here with me, jmc, or anyone else. There is no reason to turn a civilized debate into a rancorous slanging match.

Even a programmer like yourself must possess some interpersonal skills.

Splatt
Posts: 1497
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:46 am

Re: Vaccination efficacy - ask a stupid question...

Post by Splatt »

A "vaccine passport" is nothing like a driving test or similar.

This is requiring someone to have a medical procedure which most people do not need and the process of which has a non-zero chance of negative effects ranging from minor to severe.
.....and to do that every year.

And if you don't roll that dice you could be restrictions from travel, work or anything else.

There are no potential negative effects from not having a driving licence or anything similar. You can still *do* everything normal in life.

There are also no potential negative health effects beyond your control from sitting a driving test.

fon
Posts: 1172
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:47 pm

Re: Vaccination efficacy - ask a stupid question...

Post by fon »

OK, it's a nice little logic game, so we'll play it to the end.
bradw4 wrote: Sat Feb 20, 2021 1:42 am
I'm not contending that an unvaccinated room may be the safer option. Obviously, it wouldn't. My question was simply why a vaccinated room may be safer if it has not yet been definitely established that the vaccine prevents transmission between people.
You asked why a vaccinated room may be safer. It is because a hazard is always present in the unvaccinated room, while a hazard is only present in the vaccinated room in certain circumstances (if the vaccine does not prevent transmission (irrespective of whether it is established)) hence, there is a chance it is safer. case shut.

We know the unvaccinated room is unsafe, hence using the precautionary principle, we would use the vaccinated room. Precautionary principle : Out of precaution we would try to avoid a room that is known to be unsafe, if another room might be safer, but never less safe.
In order to justify passports, the government needs to demonstrate that it is taking proportionate action. But then you find yourself in the realm of protected characteristics. The question of proportionality becomes central.
Of course it becomes central now, since you've lost the logic battle. And to ban vaccine passports, the government needs to demonstrate that it is taking proportionate action. At present I can get a vaccine and ask the doctor to confirm it, are you suggesting this should be not allowed? That sounds totalitarian to me!
Please, don't get personal on here with me, jmc, or anyone else. There is no reason to turn a civilized debate into a rancorous slanging match.
I'll do as I please. jmc was being a nuisance.

fon
Posts: 1172
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:47 pm

Re: Vaccination efficacy - ask a stupid question...

Post by fon »

bradw4 wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 8:33 pm
fon wrote: Fri Feb 19, 2021 1:06 pm 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?
No. b is a scientific statement, as it is true as long is it is unknown whether vaccines reduce transmission. That is why b says "may be more more likely", in one leg, it leaves the possibility that it is not more likely (should vaccines not reduce transmission) while leaving the other leg, that it is more likely (should vaccines reduce transmission). Either way, b is a true statement, because both legs are joined by the 'may', I put in there. You will need a sharper pencil to catch me out!

bradw4
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2021 4:23 pm

Re: Vaccination efficacy - ask a stupid question...

Post by bradw4 »

fon wrote: Sat Feb 20, 2021 12:47 am It would be almost pointless to have any system without recording the facts about it. Look, is it totalitarian to record that you have passed your driving test or have English citizenship? If not, then your argument is shot down.
Not having a driving license does not prevent your participation in normal life. Provided you don't get behind the wheel, you are free to do anything else.

Not having a vaccination passport prevents you from participating in numerous aspects of normal life. And if the vaccine does not prevent you from getting Covid or passing it on, the passport itself is useless.

But at least a driving license proves you can drive a car. What does a vaccination passport prove?

Brazen casuistry, but well done for trying.
fon wrote: Sat Feb 20, 2021 12:50 pm You asked why a vaccinated room may be safer. It is because a hazard is always present in the unvaccinated room, while a hazard is only present in the vaccinated room in certain circumstances (if the vaccine does not prevent transmission (irrespective of whether it is established)) hence, there is a chance it is safer. case shut.
So, you're suggesting that the government would be justified in imposing a massively bureaucratic and intrusive domestic passport system because there is a chance it is safer?

Do you even understand the meaning of the word proportionality?

There are many things in life, especially concerning Covid, that are not as certain as your peremptory attitude implies. Case open.
fon wrote: Sat Feb 20, 2021 12:50 pm At present I can get a vaccine and ask the doctor to confirm it, are you suggesting this should be not allowed? That sounds totalitarian to me!
Where did I say that?

It's a notionally free country. You are as free to obtain a certificate of vaccination from your GP as you are to exhibit your God complex on this forum.

Really, knock yourself out.

This is like arguing with Comic Book Guy from the Simpsons.

bradw4
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2021 4:23 pm

Re: Vaccination efficacy - ask a stupid question...

Post by bradw4 »

Anne wrote: Sat Feb 20, 2021 1:06 am Added to which, my NHS leaflet which has recently arrived states "We do not yet know whether it will stop you from catching and passing on the virus".
If that remains the government's position, the case for vaccination passports is built on sand.

Splatt
Posts: 1497
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:46 am

Re: Vaccination efficacy - ask a stupid question...

Post by Splatt »

bradw4 wrote: Sat Feb 20, 2021 9:22 pm If that remains the government's position, the case for vaccination passports is built on sand.
Ultimately Israeli data shows that Pfizer probably does stop transmission and infection, almost totally.
Unfortunately we're going for 80% Oxford where all the data points to it not doing so.

So its likely we'll have a minority of the population that cant spread it and a majority who can.

fon
Posts: 1172
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:47 pm

Re: Vaccination efficacy - ask a stupid question...

Post by fon »

bradw4 wrote: Sat Feb 20, 2021 9:08 pm
fon wrote: Sat Feb 20, 2021 12:47 am
So, you're suggesting that the government would be justified in imposing a massively bureaucratic and intrusive domestic passport system because there is a chance it is safer?
That can be simplified - the government is justified in facilitating vaccination certificates because it is safer. But do you understand the meaning of the word safer?

Safer _means_ less chance of a mishap, hence your long winded argument lies in tatters, and you are understandably sore; your pride has been dented. I knew I'd defeat your inane logic the instant I saw it. God try, now move on.
Do you even understand the meaning of the word proportionality?
Yes, it involves the degree of safety, which is presently uncertain until data arizes, you have retreated from an absolute argument to one of degree, usually a last redoubt and certainly one that involves a clash of opinions. good luck with it, since the precautionary principle suggests we should separate the vaccinated from the unvaccinated until we have data.

In fact that is the ONLY way to get the data you want.I f we mix the vaccinated and unvaccinated, the data would never arise. Hence another reason to have
vaccination certificates. Ha Ha Ha! Boom! Boom!
You are as free to obtain a certificate of vaccination from your GP as you are to exhibit your God complex on this forum.
It's warms the cockles of my heart to see total capitulation. I enjoyed discussing it with you, although you rather lost your dignity by turning snippy.

Post Reply