Jump to content

RaVaGe

Members
  • Posts

    1,285
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Posts posted by RaVaGe

  1. 51 minutes ago, csWaldo said:

    Source?

    From everything I could gather, vaccinated people with breakthrough cases are likely just as infectious as unvaccinated people.
    However symptomatic cases and likely also asymptomatic cases are much less likely among vaccinated. There don't seem to be clear studies comparing the risks of infection from vaccinated vs unvaccinated people, however the data we do have suggests that the vaccinated to pose a lower risk to those around them.

    Because breakthrough cases still do occur in the vaccinated and because we cannot rule out infectious but asymptomatic cases entirely it is still recommended for vaccinated people to wear masks and practice good hygiene and social distancing.

    So from what I can tell no clear numbers saying that the vaccinated are fully safe but there is a clear trend towards reduced risk through vaccination. Certainly nothing that says that vaccinated people are somehow a greater risk to others.

    Speaking from a purely personal perspective, to me it looks like the people getting their vaccines are also the same people that already were quite conscious of the risk to them and to others. They are the type of people that always kept distance, wore their masks properly and still do with some mask mandates lifted.

    However there seems to be significant overlap between the people that engage in dangerous behavior during the pandemic and those that are still doubtful of the vaccines and refuse getting it for non medical reasons.

    I'm going to go out on a limb here and call bs on your claim. I think the people that refuse protection and show poor decision making regarding the pandemic are likely the larger risk.

    In french, but I think well educated people like you can understand it perfectly.

    Quote

    However symptomatic cases and likely also asymptomatic cases are much less likely among vaccinated.

    Source ?

    Quote

    Because breakthrough cases still do occur in the vaccinated and because we cannot rule out infectious but asymptomatic cases entirely it is still recommended for vaccinated people to wear masks and practice good hygiene and social distancing.

    Never said the opposite, no idea why you talk about that completely different topic, you kinda enjoy walling text for no purpose I guess. So fun to see you directly elude the whole point and slip again the 'unvacc people are danger to society and must be shut down at all cost'.

    1 hour ago, dux said:

    Insulting me already for saying get vaccinated? Thanks buddy. Say's a lot.

    Answering with a snide remark ? Say's a lot.

  2. 8 hours ago, Pericolos0 said:

    you have the right not to get vaccinated but that choice doesn't deserve any respect lmao

    its not the big pandora's box you think it is. We live in a society. You don't want to get vaccinated and do the barest minimum effort to help protect the people around you? Maybe you don't get to go to the restaurant then.

    The barest minimum effort ? What effort lol, don't you think it's just a totally different subject here ? I believe it's a total distrust and a complete rejection of the actual system by a big part of the population, it's not a question wether or not you want to protect to people around you, again i'm not against vaccines, but I just don't get that obsession to sting all the fucking planet, free to you to vaccinate yourself and your childrens with that (albeit i'm pretty sure you won't, nor you don't have any).

  3. 5 hours ago, kleinluka said:

    Nope,

    high vaccination turnout has reduced ICU and hospitalizations and deaths across the board.

    Ok, if I might follow your thought process, does your mom (I really hope she's well now) is a smoker or drink from time to time ? Even if not, would you let a close one die because he was a smoker, despite it's written on every damn cigarette pack that it is harmfull ? Would you let someone die from a heavy car crash because he's 100% in fault ? You could argue it's a totally different case, I believe it's not, and once you start to cherry pick patients because they have made retarded decisions in the past, it's getting pretty fucked up imo, and for what ? Just because our medical system is from another era, you see many hospitals reducing their amount of beds, reducing their staff, reducing the amount of numerus clausus accepted and then recruiting from foreign countries.

    There are many arguments for vaccination or not, but using the 'if you don't get vacc, you can't get treatment' is such a retarded one. I think every medical system that kinda work is  based on a collective system, why someone should pay for your cancer treatment when he's forced out of the system ? You see, this thing can go pretty far in both directions and, pandemic or not, I believe we should not go that way.

     

  4. On 1/6/2021 at 5:13 PM, kleinluka said:

    Why should others have to pay the (sometimes ultimate) price for people who choose to ignore the advice of every health agency on the planet? Fuck yes, I would want to be kept separate from people who pose a risk to me and my family.

    The two main vaccines currently have an efficacy of 90+ %, there will be others rolling out shortly where this protection is only in the realm of 70%

    I think many of these things will largely depend on whether it can be determined that the vaccines prevent transmission, which as of right now I think we still need more data to say for sure.

    If the vaccines don't stop transmission, then herd immunity through vaccine becomes far-fetched and at that point it really doesn't make a difference to me if you get vaccinated or not.

    However, the unvaccinated portion of the population would still be an unjust burden on the medical system by continuing to fill up ICUs and hospitals. Here in Ontario they are now pausing cancer surgeries because our ICUs are packed full of covid patients. I'm sorry but if you don't vaccinate because you just don't want to but then need to be hospitalized and meanwhile my mom gets her cancer surgery delayed and risks death because of your choice...you see why I would have a problem with this? If you actually had a legit reason not to get vaccinated, like a medical condition, that's a totally different thing and anyone would understand. But if you don't get vaccinated because of some unfounded rumour about vaccine safety, something that is not based on legitimate data or scientific fact, then yes, it should be you who pays the price for that choice and not my mom, or somebody else's mom.

    The vaccine has now been given to millions of people across the world and there have been, to my knowledge, reports of less than 10 severe reactions, most of which were treated within an hour and the patient released home. There is no scientific evidence the vaccine poses a risk in the long-term and no reason to think that it would.

    A little bit late on that statement, but have you changed your mind about all of this or do you still consider your point of view completely legitimate ?

    I would argue that declining patients solely based on their medical conditions/way of life is a pretty dark path to follow. How about our medical system is a clusterfuck and we need to improve it ?

  5. 39 minutes ago, Pericolos0 said:

    I was planning to visit family in october 2019, delayed the trip to march 2020 because of a busy time at work.. Then covid happened. Been 3 years since I've been back home :(. Meanwhile I got vaccinated last week here in the US but my parents (both 60+) still don't know when they will be in Belgium. Hope I'll be able to travel before Christmas.

     

    It's been an weird time. For me and my fiancee its not been too bad, we've been blessed to have a small bubble of good friends we've been hanging out with, and actually did a lot of camping and road trips. Feeling a weird guilt when I talk to family in Belgium, where they've had very strict measures, not allowing people to travel or have gatherings for a long time. 

    It's been hell in Belgium for a while now, as I work in Luxembourg I needed to fill a derogation just to cross the country, a lot of things are closed, and the gov keeps taking retarded decisions that change overnight, like sometimes you can only see 2 people (lol), then you can see 5, then it comes back to 2.

    Just pure retarded country, at least it's not worse than France on that subject.

     

    BTW in Belgium we have a whopping amount of 2.800 reanimation beds 😂

  6. 2 hours ago, Minos said:

    I'm not anti-vaccine, I just think this whole affair is being handled in a very reckless manner, and at the same time, there are all kinds of agendas being shoved down everyone's throats in the middle of the confusion. We live in a time of excessive information, of hyperreality, where the online/information world is more "real" than reality itself. Most of the information we consume is carefully orchestrated by varied interests. It's very hard to have independent thought, make your own decisions, and not be "punished" if your decisions fall outside mainstream consensus. (the basis of a free world)

    Here's an interesting piece of information. I'm a regular reader of CNBC, sometimes they have useful financial information in there. I've been seeing this Dr. Scott Gottlieb appear live all the time, being presented as a big authority on the pandemic, etc... I did a quick google search this is what his wikipedia says about him:

    So this guy is at the same time: Former FDA chief, venture capitalist and investor in CNBC, board member at PFizer and a resident fellow at a think tank with a long history of involvement in shaping the public narrative. How can one believe he is presenting information that have the public's best interest in mind, when he has so much to gain from pushing a very very specific agenda? This is the kind of people who suppress contradictory information that doesn't fall into their view of reality. The current landscape is filled with such figures dictating public policies, and using this pandemic to advance their own personal causes.

    Anyway, here's a good read about the vaccine itself:

    https://www.sciencenews.org/article/covid-19-coronavirus-vaccines-questions-social-distance-mask-transmission
     

      Reveal hidden contents

     

    What’s more, neither the Pfizer nor the Moderna vaccine trials tested whether the vaccines prevent people from being infected with the virus. Those trials, instead, focused on whether people were shielded from developing disease symptoms. That means that it’s not clear whether vaccinated people could still develop asymptomatic infections — and thus still be able to spread the virus to others.

    Q: Will people still need to still wear a mask and socially distance after being vaccinated? A: Yes. It takes several weeks to build up vaccine-induced antibodies and other immune defenses, and both vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna require a booster dose 21 to 28 days after the first dose. So the full protection offered by the vaccines would take at least a month to develop. And since the vaccines don’t work perfectly, and it’s not known yet to what extent they prevent infection, it’s possible that a vaccinated person might get the virus and be able to pass it on to others.

     

     

    Minos stop thinking and listen to the experts :fist::mad:

     

  7. Quote

    There is what, 4 vaccines at roughly the same stage and effectiveness by now?

    Right now there's too few data to prove the advertised promotion of effectiveness from the vaccines.

    I'm not anti-vaccines at all btw.

    https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/11/investing/pfizer-ceo-albert-bourla-stock-sale-vaccine/index.html

    Now when you see things like that, it just change the way you perceive things, governments keep repeating the same mistakes, first was with remdesivir, now with those vaccines. I'm just more and more skeptical about the intentions of the big pharma companies and governments by seeing how this crisis has been so poorly handled this year.

    There's simply too much money at stake, having CEO's acting like that during a crisis just shows what's trully important here. Having a guy who failed to manage virus issues on the OS system he created, and who is now the main contributor of the WHO and heavily promotes vaccination is also a bit funny if you ask me, without going in any sorts of complotist theories, it just feels weird.

    I'll just wait I guess.

  8. 2 hours ago, blackdog said:

    What you mean by that, and does it refer to any country in particular? Reading this makes sense to me only where hospitals are private, and where I lived (Italy, UK) hospitals are run by the government anyway.

    I'm talking about forcing people to vaccinate, where you litteraly get called in a camp and get vaccinated by a mix of meds and military medics, the whole thing making it impossible to bypass it. Pure speculation of course, but i'm wondering wether or not some govs will have the balls to push it as far as that.

  9. Just a few question, who's planning to get vaccinated ?

    How much time before the government will take over hospitals and doctors to prevent fake vaccination proof ?

    How much time before the non-vaccinated people have to wear a yellow star on their jackets when they go out ?

     

    Discuss.

×
×
  • Create New...