News Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread IV

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

Jan 23, 2019
11,925
43,701
AFL Club
North Melbourne
So 473 new cases and around 5 hours of investigation per case= a years work for a single contact tracer.

We might as well turn off the lights to Melbourne, we are Max *******
1631528345112.png
 
Part your hair, form into ponytails, tie them around below your chin and snip it yourself.

This tip only works for long hair, obviously.
I’m too scared to do that😭
 
My 19 year old is booked in.

‘My 17 year old has had his first and second due in three weeks.

My 14 year old gets her first on Thursday.


That these fools are trying to overturn 150 years of known science is disgraceful. They justify the anti-vaxxer position with their sh*t.

Vaccines have always carried a degree of risk; that it is monumentally lower than the damage COVID does to you should be all there is to know.
You know he is reporting the advice of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation don't you? The UK Government advisory body for UK health departments. The UK version of ATAGI.

They just released this:


I'll quote from it:

The assessment by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) is that the health benefits from vaccination are marginally greater than the potential known harms. However, the margin of benefit is considered too small to support universal vaccination of healthy 12 to 15 year olds at this time.

For the vast majority of children, SARS-CoV-2 infection is asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic and will resolve without treatment. Of the very few children aged 12 to 15 years who require hospitalisation, the majority have underlying health conditions. The committee has recommended the expansion of the list of conditions to which the offer applies for at-risk 12 to 15 year olds.


So they have recommended against children under 16 being vaccinated unless they have underlying medical conditions. They have even expanded the list of conditions that should be included ie expanded the list of at risk under 16 year olds who should get vaccinated. Its not like they're anti-vaxxers. Its their job to advise the UK government on vaccination policy, across all vaccinations, most of which are done in childhood. they are, by definition, pro-vaxxers.

They said:

There is evidence of an association between mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and myocarditis. This is an extremely rare adverse event. The medium- to long-term effects are unknown and long-term follow-up is being conducted.

Given the very low risk of serious COVID-19 disease in otherwise healthy 12 to 15 year olds, considerations on the potential harms and benefits of vaccination are very finely balanced and a precautionary approach was agreed.


I'm pretty sure DR got canned for expressing this very sentiment. Yet here we the UK vaccination advisory board or committee bringing up the same issue.

This isn't a final statement either. They said this:

When deciding on childhood immunisations, the JCVI has consistently maintained that the main focus should be the benefits to children themselves, balanced against any potential harms to them from vaccination.

As longer-term data on potential adverse reactions accumulates, greater certainty may allow for a reconsideration of the benefits and harms. This data may not be available for several months.


So they are waiting to make a scientific decision based on usable data. They may recommend kids get vaccinated in future if the data supports that.

Jonathon Cook isn't trying to overturn 150 years of science and either is the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation. Both are suggesting caution at the moment wrt to vaccinating kids. The JCVI knows far more about this than you or I. We aren't a body of mostly professors advising a government on immunisation policy.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Every few weeks, I sit in the shower while the wife gets to work on me with the number 2 clippers. A couple months ago, she got distracted by one of the kids, the comb fell off the clippers and she gave me a nice bald stripe on the back of my bonce. Sort of a reverse Dustin Martin look.
 
I just heard about the Mu variant which is now in the USA.

- likely more vaccine resistant than other strains
- likely more transmissible

ahhh
 

hilly

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 27, 2000
15,644
31,363
Frank Grey Smith Bar
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Triple M commentary team
Last lockdown I grew my hair out. Being in a client facing role now this isnt an option.
Found an underground barber last week. Never felt better.
Doing them a favour too I guess
Let me guess, $85 but you get a 'free' beer?

On SM-G950F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Let me guess, $85 but you get a 'free' beer?

On SM-G950F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Was at a Steve Earle concert years ago, stubbies were $5 each. Before the gig began I was yacking to some good folk, anyway, I ducked off to grab a beer and snagged a t-shirt for $20 along the way. Got back to the group and they asked about the shirt, told 'em "they're $30 bucks and you get 2 free beers". Off they went for the deal of the year, funny as :cool:
 
I still remember before lockdown at the captains run I was in the shop and I came out and there were 3 middle age guys like in their 40s sitting there and they all looked at me and I got so intimidated and I still have nightmares

You have nightmares because 3 guys looked at you? :O
 
Every few weeks, I sit in the shower while the wife gets to work on me with the number 2 clippers. A couple months ago, she got distracted by one of the kids, the comb fell off the clippers and she gave me a nice bald stripe on the back of my bonce. Sort of a reverse Dustin Martin look.

I liked where you were going in that first sent but after that you lost me mate. I was thinking ‘distracted’ and one of your nuts got grazed, oh well better luck next time you’re in the shower with the missus 😀
 
Mar 16, 2001
23,964
55,788
Melbourne VIC
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Wales, Eastwood, West Ham

Good article, and related to our conversation about being honest with people on what the vaccine does (protect you from severe illness, hospitalisation, death compared to the unvaccinated) and what it does not do (stop you from getting and transmitting the virus).

I’m not hearing enough in our post-COVID plans about continuing precautions, for individuals and communities. Videos of unmasked crowds perpetuate a myth that everyone can go back to normal - even hyper normal, making up for lost time - after a “freedom day” is announced.
 
Sep 21, 2008
27,964
64,585
Vic
AFL Club
North Melbourne
So this is probably gonna irritate a few people. It raises a question about vaccinating kids under 16 tho. At least kids with no underlying conditions that put them at risk, and they should have been done by now shouldn't they?


Don’t agree with it at all. The vast majority of kids that get covid either have very mild symptoms or no symptoms at all. Research has shown you have far more immunity from coming into contact with the virus compared to the immunity you receive from getting a vaccine.
 
Don’t agree with it at all. The vast majority of kids that get covid either have very mild symptoms or no symptoms at all. Research has shown you have far more immunity from coming into contact with the virus compared to the immunity you receive from getting a vaccine.

Can do both?
 
Don’t agree with it at all. The vast majority of kids that get covid either have very mild symptoms or no symptoms at all. Research has shown you have far more immunity from coming into contact with the virus compared to the immunity you receive from getting a vaccine.
What don't you agree with? What you said is fairly close to the gist of Cook's article.

The implication I got, especially from the JCVI site itself is that the risk/benefit analysis of vaccination is not really clearly showing benefit for otherwise healthy kids. The benefit is there but weighed against the risk of rare adverse outcomes it isn't that great a benefit. But more data may change that assessment. This advice is from the UK version of ATAGI - the JCVI. the JCVI clearly emphasise the idea that medical intervention is not something to push for, its an option but not useful if it isn't necessary. This used to be a fundamental concept in medicine and I'm glad they recognise it, it does give them a bit more credibility whereas ATAGI have lost some of credibility in my eyes with their stance on the AZ vaccine.

The idea of natural immunity isn't covered by the JCVI advice. Probably because while evidence suggests its a better option for kids (based on asymptomatic or very mild infections) that evidence isn't clear enough to be definitive. Its been suggested this is the result of people who were infected with Spanish Flu when they were young (provided they recovered well.)

Its certainly clear that the older you get the better off you are with a vaccine and a vaccine might not stop infection but it probably won't stop "natural" immunity developing as well if you get infected. If anything those terms are kind of misleading. Immunity is immunity, its all natural, there is the suggestion, and definitely the hope, that immunity from vaccine then infection is stronger than from either on their own.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back