Covid-19 Welcome to Freedom

[SaintsSeptember]

Is McGowan a lunatic?

Austria’s sweeping vaccine mandate a test case for democracies

Police will soon be able to check vaccination status at traffic stops in the first Western democracy to make the jabs compulsory for almost all adults.

www.smh.com.au

Isn't it abundantly clear now that:
Vaccinations do not prevent infection, or the spread (yes as per Chief's note it reduces the severity, and duration therefore lessens the likelihood, but they are all extremely leaky)
Natural immunity is more effective than vaccine induced immunity.
Only the elderly and already sick really have anything to worry about, particularly now omicron is about.

Isn't it about time people contest these draconian and authoritarian measures? Or are we all happy to be complicit in the removal of freedoms that only two years ago everyone would have been aghast at? Are people so scared of the virus that they're allowing the government to take control of bodily autonomy?

We have given a god like status to drugs rolled out by mass pharmaceutical companies on an emergency use authorisation (they haven't yet been approved through the normal channels of scientific investigation). In 20 years Moderna failed to have a single patent approved for any drug they were trialling. Furthermore, which of the 15 globally approved vaccines should we take, or are any of them fine, so long as you comply and continue to get your boosters? What about naturally recovered people?

IF the vaccination was proven to be super effective, and IF this disease was a real threat to the majority of the population then yes, mandate away. But we're talking about a virus that has negligible danger to the majority of the population, particularly anyone under 30, or anyone fit and healthy under 60.

I think there are still more questions than answers and as the pandemic has played out, much of the rhetoric we heard in the early to mid stages of the situation have been rolled back, or proven to be questionable. Even now.. News reports are still signalling the dangers of the virus.. '38 people died from COVID today in NSW', 160 people in ICU.. OK that's all terrible, but what are the actual details? What are their age ranges? How many of them were already heavily compromised? How many of them had zero other illnesses? They don't tell you this because clickbait, and a good story trumps the truth. **EDIT found this News - COVID-19 (Coronavirus) statistics

Could many of the unvaccinated in ICU suffering from other severe illnesses, be on a multitude of drugs and be reluctant to add another intervention that may jeopardise their ongoing treatment?

It's all worth a conversation, and not be shut down as an antivaxxer when the narrative is questioned as evidence mounts against mandating vaccination of a fairly mild disease.

No its not, its obvious that vaccines prevent infection in some cases. Vacines do not make you worse than"natural immunity" you made that up.

No the measures are not draconian, and people have contested them.....most of us think you are nuttier than fruitcakes. Dumbass.

No we do not worship the drugs like gods. We recognise them for what they are, Vaccines have been vital against, polio, smallpox , rubella , etc.. this is just another one. They are a scientific tool, like cars, and elevators, and computers.

You are correct the vaccine is not "super effective" like a seatbelt in a car , it doesn't stop everyone dying. That doesn't make you right.

What you think is irrelevant given your status in the medical, scientific world.

You are making up your own scenarios , the answer is probably no.

Shut up antivaxxer.

 

[pc79]

stop with the bullshit about natural immunity being >> vaccination immunity. At best it is similar. I have not seen any credible evidence in favor of natural immunity when compared against vaccination. I have seen multiple cases of the "naturally immune" (having had PCR proven mild infection) representing with intubation and mechanical ventilation with another PCR proven infection.

Here you go buddy. https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/113253

CDC report looking at the hospitalisation rates (per 100,000) of all vaccine/health statuses during May - Nov 21. Delta wave which we know was far more severe than the current omicron wave.

Unvaccinated with no previous Covid diagnosis have a far higher hospitalisation rate than the vaccinated with no previous diagnosis (to be expected), which again has a far greater rate than the unvaccinated recovered, which is very marginally higher than the vaccinated who have recovered.

From this information we can probably conclude that a previous infection of either an unvaccinated or vaccinated person carries almost identical future protection against hospitalisation. Sole vaccination immunity is effective to some extent, but not moreso than previous infection ... Unless you make it out differently?

 

[pc79]

No its not, its obvious that vaccines prevent infection in some cases. Vacines do not make you worse than"natural immunity" you made that up.

No the measures are not draconian, and people have contested them.....most of us think you are nuttier than fruitcakes. Dumbass.

No we do not worship the drugs like gods. We recognise them for what they are, Vaccines have been vital against, polio, smallpox , rubella , etc.. this is just another one. They are a scientific tool, like cars, and elevators, and computers.

You are correct the vaccine is not "super effective" like a seatbelt in a car , it doesn't stop everyone dying. That doesn't make you right.

What you think is irrelevant given your status in the medical, scientific world.

You are making up your own scenarios , the answer is probably no.

Shut up antivaxxer.

This is the exact braindead response I was expecting. Nothing productive, just slander. Clap clap.

I never said that 'vaccines make you worse than natural immunity'. I suggested based upon my previous post above, that vaccination immunity is not as good as naturally acquired immunity through previous infection.

These particular vaccines are more like a medication, not a vaccine. They provide limited protection that wares off in a short timeframe.

The polio/smallpox/rubella vaccines you mention all provide robust protection against illness for recipients that have proven track records of both safety and effectiveness. I have had them all (and many others, including this Covid vaccine), so your final slur demonstrates the inability to have a constructive, balanced conversation without resorting to assumptions and name calling. Pretty juvenile.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Here you go buddy. https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/113253

CDC report looking at the hospitalisation rates (per 100,000) of all vaccine/health statuses during May - Nov 21. Delta wave which we know was far more severe than the current omicron wave.

Unvaccinated with no previous Covid diagnosis have a far higher hospitalisation rate than the vaccinated with no previous diagnosis (to be expected), which again has a far greater rate than the unvaccinated recovered, which is very marginally higher than the vaccinated who have recovered.

From this information we can probably conclude that a previous infection of either an unvaccinated or vaccinated person carries almost identical future protection against hospitalisation. Sole vaccination immunity is effective to some extent, but not moreso than previous infection ... Unless you make it out differently?

It could just be the phone view but all I see from the link are the supplementary figures (4 graphs) all of which are titled case rate not hospitalisation rate.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Here you go buddy. https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/113253

CDC report looking at the hospitalisation rates (per 100,000) of all vaccine/health statuses during May - Nov 21. Delta wave which we know was far more severe than the current omicron wave.

Unvaccinated with no previous Covid diagnosis have a far higher hospitalisation rate than the vaccinated with no previous diagnosis (to be expected), which again has a far greater rate than the unvaccinated recovered, which is very marginally higher than the vaccinated who have recovered.

From this information we can probably conclude that a previous infection of either an unvaccinated or vaccinated person carries almost identical future protection against hospitalisation. Sole vaccination immunity is effective to some extent, but not moreso than previous infection ... Unless you make it out differently?

Its possible that the link you wanted to list was this one

https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/113542

this one seems to say what you are intending. It also shows that the unvaccinated and not yet infected have a 22x more likelihood of being hospitalised than a vaccinated and not yet infected. So you need to hope that you get your infection AND that it doesn't put you in hospital to reach that "natural immunity"

When if you get vaccinated, then sure you have a 3.1x hazard ratio of being hospitalised compared to someone with a previous infection, but then you become part of the most protected group (vaccinated with a prior infection)

for me the process of achieving natural immunity is inherently less safe than being vaccinated then realising that's all you can do and if corona comes you have minimised your hospitalisation chance as best you can (ie the safer way of getting natural immunity)

 

[Pessimistic]

There’s voluntary unvaccinated and involuntary unvaccinated (really young and really old plus compromised)

High levels of vaccination generally are supposed to protect them to a degree. In our current situation, it appears they do not


Need. Better. Vaccines

 

[pc79]

Its possible that the link you wanted to list was this one

https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/113542

this one seems to say what you are intending. It also shows that the unvaccinated and not yet infected have a 22x more likelihood of being hospitalised than a vaccinated and not yet infected. So you need to hope that you get your infection AND that it doesn't put you in hospital to reach that "natural immunity"

Yes, I was addressing your point that you hadn't seen any evidence that natural immunity was more robust than vaccine induced immunity.

I don't disagree with the fact that vaccination provides more protection than not having anything, clearly evidenced in the link. However consider the fact that 22x a minute number is still a minute number.

Also consider other things that are more dangerous than covid:
1 - eating (choking)
2 - insect stings (allergies)
3 - swimming (drowning)
4 - sunbaking (sunstroke)
5 - storms (fallen trees/lightning strikes)

 

[Carringbush2010]

So you need to hope that you get your infection AND that it doesn't put you in hospital to reach that "natural immunity"

Can I ask, depending on who you are i:e a fit healthy young vs old obese or anywhere in between are the numbers of hospitalization likely to be high or hospital straining? If infection vs vaccine?

As someone who is not all over the science and can only comment from msm reporting, I'd argue what we're told is that this virus, in particular the omi variant - there's a good chance if you're reasonably healthy infection will not put you in hospital, even asymptomatic.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Can I ask, depending on who you are i:e a fit healthy young vs old obese or anywhere in between are the numbers of hospitalization likely to be high or hospital straining? If infection vs vaccine?
There was always a chance of asymptomatic even with unvaccinated regular covid. It’s very difficult to track trends (as we have moved away from mass testing approaches). The issue for hospital strain is if large numbers get infected as generally population is fat and has comorbidity. So vaccination reduces that risk of hospitalisation compared to unvaccinated; the end goal if all/as many as can be are vaccinated then the numbers getting admitted won’t swamp system. We are currently in downslope of hospitalisation and the hope is with the fairly wide infection and good vaccination rate future peaks will not be as bad. I suppose we can compare uk/ us/ Italy (haven’t checked myself) to see if their subsequent waves were better or worse (this is Australia’s first real widespread wave)
As someone who is not all over the science and can only comment from msm reporting, I'd argue what we're told is that this virus, in particular the omi variant - there's a good chance if you're reasonably healthy infection will not put you in hospital, even asymptomatic.

 

[Carringbush2010]

It'd be ideal if we could vaccinate only those that really need it, but obviously that is not possible.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

This is the exact braindead response I was expecting. Nothing productive, just slander. Clap clap.

I never said that 'vaccines make you worse than natural immunity'. I suggested based upon my previous post above, that vaccination immunity is not as good as naturally acquired immunity through previous infection.

These particular vaccines are more like a medication, not a vaccine. They provide limited protection that wares off in a short timeframe.

The polio/smallpox/rubella vaccines you mention all provide robust protection against illness for recipients that have proven track records of both safety and effectiveness. I have had them all (and many others, including this Covid vaccine), so your final slur demonstrates the inability to have a constructive, balanced conversation without resorting to assumptions and name calling. Pretty juvenile.

Its a response to your idiotic "list "

Natural immunity through previous infection is nice, but you have to risk the infection, which is the whole idea of the vaccination.
Those vaccines were new vaccines when they were new.

My juvenile response was to "

It's all worth a conversation, and not be shut down as an antivaxxer when the narrative is questioned as evidence mounts against mandating vaccination of a fairly mild disease. " to which i light heatedly responded, "shut up antivaxxer".

but it really isn't worth a conversation. The evidence is not mounting against mandated vaccination.
A lot of your points are simply wrong.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Here you go buddy. https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/113253

CDC report looking at the hospitalisation rates (per 100,000) of all vaccine/health statuses during May - Nov 21. Delta wave which we know was far more severe than the current omicron wave.

Unvaccinated with no previous Covid diagnosis have a far higher hospitalisation rate than the vaccinated with no previous diagnosis (to be expected), which again has a far greater rate than the unvaccinated recovered, which is very marginally higher than the vaccinated who have recovered.

From this information we can probably conclude that a previous infection of either an unvaccinated or vaccinated person carries almost identical future protection against hospitalisation. Sole vaccination immunity is effective to some extent, but not moreso than previous infection ... Unless you make it out differently?

Have you considered that those likely to have had a severe reaction to Covid may have died when they contracted it, so those who have had it a second time are less likely to be hospitalised?
100% of people who died when they contracted Covid, will not need to be hospitalized for Covid ever again.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Can I ask, depending on who you are i:e a fit healthy young vs old obese or anywhere in between are the numbers of hospitalization likely to be high or hospital straining? If infection vs vaccine?

As someone who is not all over the science and can only comment from msm reporting, I'd argue what we're told is that this virus, in particular the omi variant - there's a good chance if you're reasonably healthy infection will not put you in hospital, even asymptomatic.

What you're told by who?

 

[Carringbush2010]

What you're told by who?

Well unless you've been living on mars, it seems the popular narrative that is reported to us by msm is that Omi is less virulent, in fact since the start we've been informed that serious infection resulting in intubation or death is not the rule but rather the exception.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Well unless you've been living on mars, it seems the popular narrative that is reported to us by msm is that Omi is less virulent, in fact since the start we've been informed that serious infection resulting in intubation or death is not the rule but rather the exception.

I'd argue what we're told is that this virus, in particular the omi variant - there's a good chance if you're reasonably healthy infection will not put you in hospital, even asymptomatic.

I've read that the risk of being hospitalized with Omicron is around a third of what it was with Delta.

I guess it depends what "a good chance " is.

Surely there is a really really really good chance that any person won't have a significant reaction to a vaccine.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I'd argue what we're told is that this virus, in particular the omi variant - there's a good chance if you're reasonably healthy infection will not put you in hospital, even asymptomatic.

I've read that the risk of being hospitalized with Omicron is around a third of what it was with Delta.

I guess it depends what "a good chance " is.

Surely there is a really really really good chance that any person won't have a significant reaction to a vaccine.

Yep, that's what's being reported.

 

[pc79]

Yep, that's what's being reported.

The risk at the delta stage in the UK was 6 in 1000 chance of being hospitalised. That included all those who incidentally had covid which was estimated as many as half of those.. then consider that not everyone in the community who had covid (asymptomatic/not testing) was reporting, so they number is worst case scenario.
If omicron is 1/3 as dangerous (as Saints suggests) that leaves the entire populations blended risks of hospitalisation is less than 1 in 1,000.

So, it really isn't a risk at all if you're taking on the virus as a young, healthy, fit 40 something or younger.

 

[pc79]

Its a response to your idiotic "list "

Natural immunity through previous infection is nice, but you have to risk the infection, which is the whole idea of the vaccination.
Those vaccines were new vaccines when they were new.

My juvenile response was to "

It's all worth a conversation, and not be shut down as an antivaxxer when the narrative is questioned as evidence mounts against mandating vaccination of a fairly mild disease. " to which i light heatedly responded, "shut up antivaxxer".

but it really isn't worth a conversation. The evidence is not mounting against mandated vaccination.
A lot of your points are simply wrong.

Fair enough. Obviously text is non tonal, so tongue in cheek/sarcastic comments aren't decipherable.

There is evidence that omicron is breaking through/evading the vaccine, so there has the be an alternative approach, unless the vaccines are tweaked and shown to be more effective.

These drugs are also still under emergency use authorisation, so mandating them before they are absolutely cleared for use in my opinion is wrong - thats not even taking in to consideration their limited effectiveness.

 

[Carringbush2010]

The risk at the delta stage in the UK was 6 in 1000 chance of being hospitalised. That included all those who incidentally had covid which was estimated as many as half of those.. then consider that not everyone in the community who had covid (asymptomatic/not testing) was reporting, so they number is worst case scenario.
If omicron is 1/3 as dangerous (as Saints suggests) that leaves the entire populations blended risks of hospitalisation is less than 1 in 1,000.

So, it really isn't a risk at all if you're taking on the virus as a young, healthy, fit 40 something or younger.

Well being a 50+ I have my concerns, that's why I'm triple vaxxed, all the info I can use is that it's better to be vaxxed than not as far as virulence is concerned.

I'm not concerned about getting it IF I'm asymptomatic or have very mild symptoms. Still I'm not gonna take the chance, coz I am 'possibly vulnerable' to high virulence.

There's also good argument that probably at least half the population are what one could consider 'possibly vulnerable'

 

[Carringbush2010]

Fair enough. Obviously text is non tonal, so tongue in cheek/sarcastic comments aren't decipherable.

There is evidence that omicron is breaking through/evading the vaccine, so there has the be an alternative approach, unless the vaccines are tweaked and shown to be more effective.

These drugs are also still under emergency use authorisation, so mandating them before they are absolutely cleared for use in my opinion is wrong - thats not even taking in to consideration their limited effectiveness.

What alternative approach?

Lock away vulnerable groups from the rest of the population?

 

[Gavin Excell]

What alternative approach?

Lock away vulnerable groups from the rest of the population?

Invermectin, Trump, etc

 

[Carringbush2010]

Invermectin, Trump, etc

Hydrochoriquine? or whatever you call it?

 

[sr36]

The risk at the delta stage in the UK was 6 in 1000 chance of being hospitalised. That included all those who incidentally had covid which was estimated as many as half of those.. then consider that not everyone in the community who had covid (asymptomatic/not testing) was reporting, so they number is worst case scenario.
If omicron is 1/3 as dangerous (as Saints suggests) that leaves the entire populations blended risks of hospitalisation is less than 1 in 1,000.

So, it really isn't a risk at all if you're taking on the virus as a young, healthy, fit 40 something or younger.

Delta in the UK occured in a population with high levels of naturally acquired immunity and high levels of vaccination.

Looking at whole population hospitalisation rates from Delta in the UK tells you nothing about the risk of hospitalisation for those who hadn't had their immune response primed by either the vaccine or a previous case of covid.

I've got no idea what data looks like for that group, just suggesting that your method of looking at it is flawed.

 

[pc79]

Delta in the UK occured in a population with high levels of naturally acquired immunity and high levels of vaccination.

Looking at whole population hospitalisation rates from Delta in the UK tells you nothing about the risk of hospitalisation for those who hadn't had their immune response primed by either the vaccine or a previous case of covid.

I've got no idea what data looks like for that group, just suggesting that your method of looking at it is flawed.

Refer to the site that SaintsSeptember posted previously. This is the CDCs analysis of the data for California/New York, a large dataset, may-nov 21. Clearly shows the unvaccinated with no previous infection are the most likely to require hospital treatment. That's inarguable and has been for a long time.

However...is a one size fits all strategy to vaccinate everyone the right one?

Is the vaccine effective in stopping infection/transmission?

Is everyone similarly at risk of hospitalisation?

Should vaccine mandates be enforced based on the CDC evidence where the previously recovered unvaccinated are demonstrated to be less likely to require hospitalisations than uninfected vaccinated? More evidence will continue to come out supporting this information.

 

[sr36]

Refer to the site that SaintsSeptember posted previously. This is the CDCs analysis of the data for California/New York, a large dataset, may-nov 21. Clearly shows the unvaccinated with no previous infection are the most likely to require hospital treatment. That's inarguable and has been for a long time.

However...is a one size fits all strategy to vaccinate everyone the right one?

Is the vaccine effective in stopping infection/transmission?

Is everyone similarly at risk of hospitalisation?

Should vaccine mandates be enforced based on the CDC evidence where the previously recovered unvaccinated are demonstrated to be less likely to require hospitalisations than uninfected vaccinated? More evidence will continue to come out supporting this information.

Currently with the Omicron strain breaking through vaccines, the benefit of the vaccine is really all about the initial exposure to covid - better off having it through a vaccine than the virus so your immune system kicks in more effectively.

In terms of mandates, I've got no interest in forcing people to make the safer smarter decision of vax for their own sake. For me, mandates should depend on hospital overload. If people not being vaxed is going to cause too much stress on hospitals which results in deaths to others from either the virus or lesser access for other conditions, longer response time for paramedics, etc, as well as people having to live longer with chronic repairable conditions due to loss of elective surgery, then I don't have any qualms with the mandates. But I haven't been following the hospital impact side of the pandemic closely enough to have much idea about excess death and increased suffering resulting from increased hospitalisation amongst the unvaxed cohort.

I do think it'd be nice if covid recoverees were exempted from any mandates as they're currently the safest in terms of both spread and hospitalisation (unless they acquired organ damage or a chronic condition within their recovery) but probably now unworkable with self tests.