4 ms·

What about Israel? [0] What about Gibralter? They have also had huge upticks in cases and are still mostly vaccinated. The idea that this vaccine is going to

What about Israel? [0] What about Gibralter? They have also had huge upticks in cases and are still mostly vaccinated. The idea that this vaccine is going to cure everything feels more and more silly -- places with high vaccination rates _still have problems_. If the goal is 100% compliance on vaccinations, what do you do about other countries? These variants will be leaking out of them until the end of time. [0] https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-DZDM-UUAInxW7?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-DZDM-UUAInxW7?format=jpg&name=...

ectopod 5y ago
And without the vaccine we would have worse problems. Most of the hospitalised in the UK are among the unvaccinated young. If the old weren't vaccinated either then the pressure on the hospitals would be far worse.
- bingohbangoh 5y ago
  Then when does this end? Vaccination is not enough? Masks aren't enough? If vaccination is not the end game, then there is no end game. There will always be some variant somewhere, even if the planet was 100% vaccinated, there would be virus multiplying in animal reservoirs.
falcolas 5y ago
> places with high vaccination rates _still have problems_. Yes, they do. But getting COVID with a vaccination means infections are not emergency-room-critical events. Getting COVID without a vaccination can be an emergency-room-critical event. So no. I still refuse to support antivaxxers politics. Once we're no longer having hospital bed overflows with every new variant - that's when I'll revisit my choice.
- bingohbangoh 5y ago
  "Once we're no longer having hospital bed overflows with every new variant" This will never happen. There will always be some new fearsome variant. You are advocating for Zero-COVID.
  - falcolas 5y ago
    You glossed over the important part of the sentence. > Hospital bed overflows That's the important part, not reaching 'Zero-COVID'. Vaccinations (or naturally occurring "immunity" due to infections) reducing the impact of new infections is sufficient to meet that criteria. And this will eventually happen. Antivaxxers are simply pushing this eventuality out, and taking out others along the way.
- croutonwagon 5y ago
  >Yes, they do. But getting COVID with a vaccination means infections are not emergency-room-critical events. Getting COVID without a vaccination can be an emergency-room-critical event. Thats not entirely true. In my town close to 20% of the hospitalizations are vaccinated. And there have been deaths amongst those as well. Of course the news, even local, is rounding down +/- 5% when its convenient and up the same margin when also convenient. But the local county and hospitals publicly post the raw data. In fact i find calling people that are skeptical of the vaccine "anti-vaxxers" to be particularly unbecoming of an individual. Thats a specific attempt to conflate them with the Jenny McCarthy brand of anti-vaccination folks. These are brand new delivery methods and science that have either never been tried before, or in VERY limited use cases (such as Ebola for viral vector) and have few if any long term studies. People shouldnt be shamed for being skeptical or questioning of the narrative. If the facts fully support the narrative or reasoning you shouldnt NEED to shame or silence dissenters to make your arguments more effective. Especially when things like breakthrough rates are specifically being ignored as of May 1, 2021 [0], when theres data that specifically points to that fact such as slide 17. [1] And the fact that people are being banned and silenced for pointing out that the vaccine does not prevent infection, or serious outcomes of infection, or even transmission and these are generally baseline requirements of othervaccines [2] For example if TDAP or the pertussis vaccine allowed vaccinated patients an 80% chance of transmitting the virus, instead of the current 10%, there would absolutely be different reccomendations out there, especially for parents of newborns. [0] https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/breakthrough-cases.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/bre... [1] https://context-cdn.washingtonpost.com/notes/prod/default/documents/54f57708-a529-4a33-9a44-b66d719070d9/note/753667d6-8c61-495f-b669-5308f2827155 https://context-cdn.washingtonpost.com/notes/prod/default/do.... [2] https://thehill.com/homenews/media/569908-twitter-bans-conservative-author-Alex-Berenson https://thehill.com/homenews/media/569908-twitter-bans-conse...
  - falcolas 5y ago
    > In my town close to 20% of the hospitalizations are vaccinated. That implies that 80% of the hospitalizations are unvaccinated. Which I then correlate to: 80% of the hospital bed use is directly preventable? 80% of the hospitalized cases are draining our resources better applied to other emergencies? Inexcusable. > Thats a specific attempt to conflate them with the Jenny McCarthy brand of anti-vaccination folks. Respectfully, I find the defense of anti-vaxxers and/or "vaccine skeptics" points of view is irrelevant to this particular thread of discussion. This thread is specifically about their outsized - and more importantly preventable - negative impact on the available medical resources. Address that, and I'm perfectly fine with the lifting of restrictions, because they won't be needed anymore. But right now? Those restrictions absolutely are needed.

ectopod 5y ago

And without the vaccine we would have worse problems. Most of the hospitalised in the UK are among the unvaccinated young. If the old weren't vaccinated either then the pressure on the hospitals would be far worse.

bingohbangoh 5y ago
Then when does this end? Vaccination is not enough? Masks aren't enough? If vaccination is not the end game, then there is no end game. There will always be some variant somewhere, even if the planet was 100% vaccinated, there would be virus multiplying in animal reservoirs.

falcolas 5y ago

> places with high vaccination rates _still have problems_. Yes, they do. But getting COVID with a vaccination means infections are not emergency-room-critical events. Getting COVID without a vaccination can be an emergency-room-critical event. So no. I still refuse to support antivaxxers politics. Once we're no longer having hospital bed overflows with every new variant - that's when I'll revisit my choice.

bingohbangoh 5y ago
"Once we're no longer having hospital bed overflows with every new variant" This will never happen. There will always be some new fearsome variant. You are advocating for Zero-COVID.
- falcolas 5y ago
  You glossed over the important part of the sentence. > Hospital bed overflows That's the important part, not reaching 'Zero-COVID'. Vaccinations (or naturally occurring "immunity" due to infections) reducing the impact of new infections is sufficient to meet that criteria. And this will eventually happen. Antivaxxers are simply pushing this eventuality out, and taking out others along the way.
croutonwagon 5y ago
>Yes, they do. But getting COVID with a vaccination means infections are not emergency-room-critical events. Getting COVID without a vaccination can be an emergency-room-critical event. Thats not entirely true. In my town close to 20% of the hospitalizations are vaccinated. And there have been deaths amongst those as well. Of course the news, even local, is rounding down +/- 5% when its convenient and up the same margin when also convenient. But the local county and hospitals publicly post the raw data. In fact i find calling people that are skeptical of the vaccine "anti-vaxxers" to be particularly unbecoming of an individual. Thats a specific attempt to conflate them with the Jenny McCarthy brand of anti-vaccination folks. These are brand new delivery methods and science that have either never been tried before, or in VERY limited use cases (such as Ebola for viral vector) and have few if any long term studies. People shouldnt be shamed for being skeptical or questioning of the narrative. If the facts fully support the narrative or reasoning you shouldnt NEED to shame or silence dissenters to make your arguments more effective. Especially when things like breakthrough rates are specifically being ignored as of May 1, 2021 [0], when theres data that specifically points to that fact such as slide 17. [1] And the fact that people are being banned and silenced for pointing out that the vaccine does not prevent infection, or serious outcomes of infection, or even transmission and these are generally baseline requirements of othervaccines [2] For example if TDAP or the pertussis vaccine allowed vaccinated patients an 80% chance of transmitting the virus, instead of the current 10%, there would absolutely be different reccomendations out there, especially for parents of newborns. [0] https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/breakthrough-cases.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/bre... [1] https://context-cdn.washingtonpost.com/notes/prod/default/documents/54f57708-a529-4a33-9a44-b66d719070d9/note/753667d6-8c61-495f-b669-5308f2827155 https://context-cdn.washingtonpost.com/notes/prod/default/do.... [2] https://thehill.com/homenews/media/569908-twitter-bans-conservative-author-Alex-Berenson https://thehill.com/homenews/media/569908-twitter-bans-conse...
- falcolas 5y ago
  > In my town close to 20% of the hospitalizations are vaccinated. That implies that 80% of the hospitalizations are unvaccinated. Which I then correlate to: 80% of the hospital bed use is directly preventable? 80% of the hospitalized cases are draining our resources better applied to other emergencies? Inexcusable. > Thats a specific attempt to conflate them with the Jenny McCarthy brand of anti-vaccination folks. Respectfully, I find the defense of anti-vaxxers and/or "vaccine skeptics" points of view is irrelevant to this particular thread of discussion. This thread is specifically about their outsized - and more importantly preventable - negative impact on the available medical resources. Address that, and I'm perfectly fine with the lifting of restrictions, because they won't be needed anymore. But right now? Those restrictions absolutely are needed.