News Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread IV

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's getting into the body in both instances.

MYbe some don't want more "lab developed" substances in their body.

In any case, I am against mandating and coercion.

From day 1 in this thread all I ever said was if you want it good, but don't force it on others who feel less inclined.

As soon as I posted that view the "poor form" was directed my way with vitriol.

The poor form was liked, and jeered. So if the poor form card is getting rolled out today, I'd say it's a tad late.
There are no mandates and there is no coercion.

You can't be forced to have a vaccine, you can't be sacked for not being vaccinated.
 
You are right that’s it’s probably inappropriate to steal a slogan that’s been misused on a much different topic, but in this case you could certainly be anti mandatory vaccinations without being anti vaccinations per se. Anti-mandate or anti-compulsion don’t roll off the tongue so well though - and the right to choice seems like such a positive, unarguable position you can see why they’ve gone with that.

I think we all agree that choice is a good thing - and pretty much all of us accept that because of the impact some possible choices might have on other people, it’s reasonable for some choices to be limited by laws and regulations, while others are moderated in most people by their own sense of community, ethics, whatever you’d call your motivation to think of others as well as yourself in the choices you exercise. Different jobs and workplaces, and different other places people interact, set different limitations or invite different levels of moderation on personal choices - easy to think of examples.

For me, vaccination against a dangerous virus that isn’t going away is a sensible precaution, and it’s reasonable that my workplace where I will again be in close contact with people, or the school where my kid will be taught, or the home where my old mother will be cared for, or places where there is a high risk of the virus spreading, would restrict choice over vaccinations so everyone goes in protected.
Medical professionals debunk it.


It shouldn’t be used as their slogan because you can literally choose not to take the vaccine.

Pro choice according to the Oxford dictionary is “ advocating the legal right of a woman to choose whether or not she will have an abortion.” It literally has absolutely nothing to do with vaccinations and shouldn’t be used just because it “rolls off the tongue”

Anti-vaccine according to the Oxford dictionary is “opposed to vaccination.”

One of the ethics is literally the right to bodily autonomy so you can choose not to have the vaccine. Saying “I have the right to my own bodily autonomy” is a way better way of going about it without undermining a movement where women don’t have the right to their bodily autonomy.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

So far we have had posters wanting unvaxed people to be shot, beaten, denied health care. Calling them selfish. Implying that they are pedos. Wanting them to be second class citizens and pariahs in their own country.

FMD. What the hell have we become ?

And before you start hen pecking me. I'm fully vaccinated . IMO .Its none of my business what other people do.
But we have a bunch of Mrs Jessups and Mrs Mangels in here and i just don't get it

I don’t think we were that specific. But yes the general gist is on the money.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Out of interest will you still have the same opinion in 3 months time when over 90% of Covid cases admitted to hospital will be double dosed vaccinated people?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Would be absolutely fine helping them because they have done everything they can to help themselves, like most things in life, all you can do is try.
 
Last edited:
My point is that people are using the argument that unvaccinated people will cause all the spread and fill hospital beds.

We will have a very small % of people unvaccinated in 2-3 months time due to all the restrictions that will be placed on them.

People are spreading false information that it will be the unvaccinated people’s fault that the hospitals will be full and they will be the main spreaders.

I understand the govt needed to pull some leavers to try and encourage/ coerce people like myself into getting the jab.

But for the govt and people to go on and on about it is a bit too much and causing mental strain on friendships and family.

Who will the Government and the people blame when the vaccinated are the main spreaders.

Will it be the people from European backgrounds because they have big family get together.

Will it be sport because we can put sport ahead of potential Covid transmissions.
The list will go on and on.

We need to get past laying blame on a particular group of people.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Your point is wrong!

The data is very clear both in Australia and around the world. The virus spreads more easilly, causes more severe illness, hospitalisations and death among the unvaccinated population than the vaccinated and significantly so. Reliable studies using large quantities of data points from the US show that teh rate of hospitalisation for the unnvaccinated is between 10 and 20 times higher adjusted for age.

Right now the stats in Australia show that it is disproportionately the unvaccinated that are clogging up our hospital systems as the following data from NSW shows.

1632439722776.png

If we were to get to the point where 100% of the population was vaccinated yes there would still be cases, hospitalisations, and death but the rate of hospitalisation, which will effectively be the most important factor in whether we are open or locked down, would be at least 90% lower.

Will we have a very small % unvaccinated in 2 or 3 months? Just on this thread, there are 4 or 5 that seemed determined that they will not have the vaccine. 80% seems like the best we can hope for in that timeframe. 20% of adults unvaccinated (circa 4 million) in a situation where we have freedom of movement can generate a lot of hospitalisations and could see us back into lockdown very quickly.
 
So what happens when we start opening up and cases go up.
We need to see a plan from Dan regarding numbers.

Many events coming up and people starting to assume sports, music, family gatherings etc etc will be ok going forward.

Will they be cancelled or scaled back if cases go above say 1000 or will we go into lockdown if we hit 3000?

I think this will be the most crucial bit of information we get to allow people and business to plan ahead.

The sooner we get clarity on this the better.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
And now people (well people on fb I went to high school with) are spreading false lies and fake news about the news live blackout/delay by using a photo from 2007 by saying "this is what the protests really were like yesterday".

Smh

I think I know the picture you’re referring to. Came up on my feed as well. I was wondering if it’s legit. 2007 would be when we rallied against the ABCC iirc.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

On “taking up beds“ and “clogging the system”, I liked this from a doctor.


Well that’s right and I have read outliers from overseas who were fit and healthy that ended up dying.

I don’t know the age group of the posters above but as posters in the Grumpy Old Thread would know, as you approach 50 everything catches up and it’s 6 monthly checks for skin cancers, 12 month bloods for everything and then medication “going in my body” in the hope that come my 70’s and 80’s I am still here and not in pain or discomfort.
 


Some key points re: recent discussions around vaccination:


While experts agree that vaccine-induced immunity against infection is likely to wane over time, breakthrough infections may also be the result of looser COVID-19 restrictions and increased socialising.

We also know early vaccine recipients tended to be older, have underlying health conditions, or work in high-risk professions — putting them at higher risk of getting infected.

What's clear is that vaccinated people still have a considerably lower chance of getting infected than unvaccinated people, which in turn, cuts their risk of passing the virus on.

Vaccinated people less likely to spread COVID
Real-world evidence shows vaccinated people are able to transmit COVID-19 to others, but it's thought their risk of doing so is substantially reduced.

"For starters, [vaccinated people] have decreased their risk of giving COVID-19 to others because they've reduced their risk of getting infected in the first place," Professor Collignon said.

"Secondly, [if they do get infected], they tend to have milder disease and have it for a shorter period of time, which also decreases their risk."

In July, a study published by the CDC found vaccinated people infected with the Delta variant carried roughly the same viral load in their noses and throats as unvaccinated people, sparking concern they could spread the virus just as easily.

But subsequent research has found this genetic material declined faster in vaccinated people, meaning they likely spread the virus for less time, Professor Esterman said.

"There's also more recent data now that shows if you're fully vaccinated, you're likely to have a lower viral load," he said.

According to the CDC, it's still not clear whether fully vaccinated people with asymptomatic infections can transmit the virus.

What is clear, however, is that unvaccinated people are still the major drivers of transmission.

In the US, infection rates in the least vaccinated states are roughly four times as high as in the most vaccinated states.

Professor Esterman said the benefits of vaccination went well beyond the individual.

"If you're fully vaccinated, you're less likely to pass COVID-19 onto others, including your own family and the general population."
 
On “taking up beds“ and “clogging the system”, I liked this from a doctor.


It's true, but most people don't make those decisions in 'moments of their life' to undertake a behaviour, in the context of a pandemic that has obliterated social life as we know it, against which they have been warned all day every day that the consequences of such a decision will be so significant as to potentially threaten the health care system's ability to treat anyone else.
 
Recent survey showed that 35% of people that got the jab believe its coercion and are against segregation being implemented.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I won't lie, I got the jab very early because I need to travel and I don't want any impediments to that.

That being said, now that I know that we will probably all catch it over the next 6-12 months, I am pretty please I have the vaccine.
 
So what happens when we start opening up and cases go up.
We need to see a plan from Dan regarding numbers.

Many events coming up and people starting to assume sports, music, family gatherings etc etc will be ok going forward.

Will they be cancelled or scaled back if cases go above say 1000 or will we go into lockdown if we hit 3000?

I think this will be the most crucial bit of information we get to allow people and business to plan ahead.

The sooner we get clarity on this the better.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I'd guess that hospitalisations will be the metric to keep an eye on.
Israel yesterday Screenshot_20210924-102836.png

Nsw yesterday Screenshot_20210924-103151.png
 
Will we have a very small % unvaccinated in 2 or 3 months? Just on this thread, there are 4 or 5 that seemed determined that they will not have the vaccine. 80% seems like the best we can hope for in that timeframe. 20% of adults unvaccinated (circa 4 million) in a situation where we have freedom of movement can generate a lot of hospitalisations and could see us back into lockdown very quickly.

Good post. FWIW I looked at 1st rate dose percentage yesterday. At a very high level we are around 83% nationally and the curve is consistent (ie. we haven't yet hit any sort of real slowdown in take up). That seems to indicate that in spite of the media portrayal and the convenience of this narrative for a Federal Government that made significant stuff ups on procurement - and leaving aside the anecdotal evidence - that vaccine hesitancy is not a huge issue in this country.
 
I won't lie, I got the jab very early because I need to travel and I don't want any impediments to that.

That being said, now that I know that we will probably all catch it over the next 6-12 months, I am pretty please I have the vaccine.

Yeh May.

As soon as that Epping case appeared that was it for me.
 
Good post. FWIW I looked at 1st rate dose percentage yesterday. At a very high level we are around 83% nationally and the curve is consistent (ie. we haven't yet hit any sort of real slowdown in take up). That seems to indicate that in spite of the media portrayal and the convenience of this narrative for a Federal Government that made significant stuff ups on procurement - and leaving aside the anecdotal evidence - that vaccine hesitancy is not a huge issue in this country.
1632445833435.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top