5 ms·

That is a good point. I used to fantasize of living in a fictional world where there is such a thing as inalienable human rights. I struggle to swallow the hard

That is a good point. I used to fantasize of living in a fictional world where there is such a thing as inalienable human rights. I struggle to swallow the hard pill that a disease with a survival rate of 99.9% in under 65s has upended that fiction. (BTW, I am not facetious, and the coming winter risks being brutal). I have long suspected that the modern 80 year life expectancy was a grand illusion. I wonder if the covid pandemic is Mother Nature's way of signalling that the party is over and it's time to return to 'Gaudeamus igitur, Iuvenes dum sumus'. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19latestinsights/deaths#deaths-by-age https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthan...

lovich 5y ago
Look, if you could actually show up with actual bodily autonomy then this would be a different conversation. The fact of the matter is that no one is capable of being autonomous in the face of communicable diseases because if you are infected you turn into a factory for the disease that affects everyone else. Citing a 99.9% survival rate is disingenuous when it’s infecting everyone. That’s blatantly obvious with Covid shooting up to 2-3 place for cause of death and if recall correctly one of those other major causes of death it’s competing with is cancer which is actually a basket of diseases with unrelated causes. Even with the vaccine “mandate” the US gov has set, you still have the option to get tested frequently and not be vaccinated. You can’t refuse the vaccine, refuse to get tested and prove you are immune, and want to walk around uninhibited in public when you could be carrying this disease. That’s not bodily autonomy that’s just saying “fuck you I do what I want” to society, so don’t be surprised when claims of “my body, my choice” or clamoring about rights falls on deaf ears to the rest of society
- nradov 5y ago
  CDC estimates do show a 99.9% survival rate for the 18-49 age group. Survival rates do decline for the older age groups. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burden.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burd... I encourage everyone to get vaccinated if they can, it's the smart thing to do. But vaccinated people can still carry and spread the virus. They may be somewhat less contagious but we don't have clear data on that yet.
  - lovich 5y ago
    I feel like you read part of my response and then wrote yours immediately. You are talking about how the vaccinated can spread the virus, which is I agree is true, but ignoring that they can only spread the virus when they get a breakthrough infection. The vaccine massively limits the chance of being infected. If you cannot recognize the fact that the change of infecting someone else is a function with two variables where x*y where x is a Boolean of isInfected and y is a floating point of chanceOfBeingInfected then I don’t know how we can continue talking as you are in a different reality than I am. If you get the vaccine your y value in the previous function drops dramatically. If you only look at the x value then of course you won’t see a value in getting vaccinated because you are ignoring the effects of vaccinating
    - nradov 5y ago
      CDC data shows that breakthrough infections are common. Since the virus is now endemic in the worldwide human population and can't be eradicated, all of us can expect to be exposed to it multiple times in our lives (just like the other 4 endemic human coronaviruses). Whether we're exposed by a vaccinated or unvaccinated individual is irrelevant. Since exposure is inevitable, the smart move is to get vaccinated yourself. And take other steps to maximize your odds of surviving a breakthrough infection.
      - lovich 5y ago
        > CDC data shows that breakthrough infections are common What do you mean by common? Do you mean that it happens or that it’s the same rate of infection as being unvaccinated? Your argument only works if the breakthrough infections are as “common” as getting infected without the vaccine. > Whether we're exposed by a vaccinated or unvaccinated individual is irrelevant But it is relevant that the chance of a vaccinated individual being contagious is _massively_ lower. You can’t argue that breakthrough infections of vaccinated individuals exist, so therefore coming into contact with a vaccinated person is as risky as coming into contact with an unvaccinated person.
        5y ago
- realreality 5y ago
  It isn't infecting everyone or affecting everyone equally. Generally, more dense and poor areas have higher case rates. It doesn't make sense to apply the same restrictions everywhere, if your odds of catching the virus happen to be slim.
  - lovich 5y ago
    >It isn't infecting everyone or affecting everyone equally. You are 100% correct. The vaccinated are barely affected while the unvaccinated are heavily affected. >It doesn't make sense to apply the same restrictions everywhere, if your odds of catching the virus happen to be slim. Correct again. We should not limit the vaccinated and prevent the unvaccinated who refuse to take routine tests from affecting the public. Just so you think I am not allowing for any other option. I am 100% fine with someone who takes a Covid test and gets a negative every single day being allowed the same public privilege's as someone who gets the vaccine. My actual issue is with people who conflate not getting the vaccine with not getting tested as well but still somehow being allowed to walk around in public
    - angelzen 5y ago
      As we delight at the thought of bringing misery to our fellow man, let's take a look at this intriguing report from UK, specifically the covid cases table at page 13 and covid case rates at page 17. Something strange: covid case rates among vaxxed/unvaxxed are roughly the same for >30 age group, showing a 2x-5x decrease in the vaxx population only for younger ages. Me thinks that this data warrants forcing all older people, vaxxed or unvaxxed, take a covid test every living day of their lives to prove their cleanliness and gain the priviledge of walking amongst the rightful. Hmm... https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1019992/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_38.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...
      - lovich 5y ago
        Oh hey, you finally posted data from a not immediately bad source that backed up your point. This is legitimately something that makes me look at the data and question current course. Now question for you. Do you have other data sets backing this up, or only the single one that goes against the other data sets? I actually am taking this into account, but a single set of data or studies that purports one conclusion is not going to make me ignore the hundreds of other studies that disagree
teddyh 5y ago
> it's time to return to 'Gaudeamus igitur, Iuvenes dum sumus'. Crescat una veritas.

lovich 5y ago

Look, if you could actually show up with actual bodily autonomy then this would be a different conversation. The fact of the matter is that no one is capable of being autonomous in the face of communicable diseases because if you are infected you turn into a factory for the disease that affects everyone else. Citing a 99.9% survival rate is disingenuous when it’s infecting everyone. That’s blatantly obvious with Covid shooting up to 2-3 place for cause of death and if recall correctly one of those other major causes of death it’s competing with is cancer which is actually a basket of diseases with unrelated causes. Even with the vaccine “mandate” the US gov has set, you still have the option to get tested frequently and not be vaccinated. You can’t refuse the vaccine, refuse to get tested and prove you are immune, and want to walk around uninhibited in public when you could be carrying this disease. That’s not bodily autonomy that’s just saying “fuck you I do what I want” to society, so don’t be surprised when claims of “my body, my choice” or clamoring about rights falls on deaf ears to the rest of society

nradov 5y ago
CDC estimates do show a 99.9% survival rate for the 18-49 age group. Survival rates do decline for the older age groups. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burden.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burd... I encourage everyone to get vaccinated if they can, it's the smart thing to do. But vaccinated people can still carry and spread the virus. They may be somewhat less contagious but we don't have clear data on that yet.
- lovich 5y ago
  I feel like you read part of my response and then wrote yours immediately. You are talking about how the vaccinated can spread the virus, which is I agree is true, but ignoring that they can only spread the virus when they get a breakthrough infection. The vaccine massively limits the chance of being infected. If you cannot recognize the fact that the change of infecting someone else is a function with two variables where x*y where x is a Boolean of isInfected and y is a floating point of chanceOfBeingInfected then I don’t know how we can continue talking as you are in a different reality than I am. If you get the vaccine your y value in the previous function drops dramatically. If you only look at the x value then of course you won’t see a value in getting vaccinated because you are ignoring the effects of vaccinating
  - nradov 5y ago
    CDC data shows that breakthrough infections are common. Since the virus is now endemic in the worldwide human population and can't be eradicated, all of us can expect to be exposed to it multiple times in our lives (just like the other 4 endemic human coronaviruses). Whether we're exposed by a vaccinated or unvaccinated individual is irrelevant. Since exposure is inevitable, the smart move is to get vaccinated yourself. And take other steps to maximize your odds of surviving a breakthrough infection.
    - lovich 5y ago
      > CDC data shows that breakthrough infections are common What do you mean by common? Do you mean that it happens or that it’s the same rate of infection as being unvaccinated? Your argument only works if the breakthrough infections are as “common” as getting infected without the vaccine. > Whether we're exposed by a vaccinated or unvaccinated individual is irrelevant But it is relevant that the chance of a vaccinated individual being contagious is _massively_ lower. You can’t argue that breakthrough infections of vaccinated individuals exist, so therefore coming into contact with a vaccinated person is as risky as coming into contact with an unvaccinated person.
      - 5y ago
realreality 5y ago
It isn't infecting everyone or affecting everyone equally. Generally, more dense and poor areas have higher case rates. It doesn't make sense to apply the same restrictions everywhere, if your odds of catching the virus happen to be slim.
- lovich 5y ago
  >It isn't infecting everyone or affecting everyone equally. You are 100% correct. The vaccinated are barely affected while the unvaccinated are heavily affected. >It doesn't make sense to apply the same restrictions everywhere, if your odds of catching the virus happen to be slim. Correct again. We should not limit the vaccinated and prevent the unvaccinated who refuse to take routine tests from affecting the public. Just so you think I am not allowing for any other option. I am 100% fine with someone who takes a Covid test and gets a negative every single day being allowed the same public privilege's as someone who gets the vaccine. My actual issue is with people who conflate not getting the vaccine with not getting tested as well but still somehow being allowed to walk around in public
  - angelzen 5y ago
    As we delight at the thought of bringing misery to our fellow man, let's take a look at this intriguing report from UK, specifically the covid cases table at page 13 and covid case rates at page 17. Something strange: covid case rates among vaxxed/unvaxxed are roughly the same for >30 age group, showing a 2x-5x decrease in the vaxx population only for younger ages. Me thinks that this data warrants forcing all older people, vaxxed or unvaxxed, take a covid test every living day of their lives to prove their cleanliness and gain the priviledge of walking amongst the rightful. Hmm... https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1019992/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_38.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...
    - lovich 5y ago
      Oh hey, you finally posted data from a not immediately bad source that backed up your point. This is legitimately something that makes me look at the data and question current course. Now question for you. Do you have other data sets backing this up, or only the single one that goes against the other data sets? I actually am taking this into account, but a single set of data or studies that purports one conclusion is not going to make me ignore the hundreds of other studies that disagree

teddyh 5y ago

> it's time to return to 'Gaudeamus igitur, Iuvenes dum sumus'. Crescat una veritas.