Why should i take a vaccine for something that's dangerous to someone else?

[QUOTE=hiphopanonymous;14471412]My understanding could be mistaken but my understanding was the vaccinated do not catch and play host - therefore do not spread - Covid as profusely or as easily as those who do not get vaccinated. Some with the vaccine certainly can and do catch it to infectious and even lethal levels yes these are those break through cases that the news loves to talk about - but the numbers are far far reduced by comparison to the unvaccinated. Therefore, in a perfect world, if everyone truly cared about dropping numbers with simple measures things like a (totally free) vaccine would be a no brainer. But my other point is - people don't care to do the right thing. So they don't.[/QUOTE]

I wouldn’t call it your understanding. More like your wishful thinking.

[quote] [B]When they analyzed the data, the researchers found wide variations in viral load within both vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, but not between them. There was no significant difference in viral load between vaccinated and unvaccinated, or between asymptomatic and symptomatic groups[/B].[/quote]

[quote]
“Vaccines have been shown to be highly effective in preventing severe disease, hospitalization and death from COVID-19. For example, as of mid-September, 41 out of 49 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at UC Davis Medical Center in Sacramento were unvaccinated.

Breakthrough infections where vaccinated people do become sick can occur, especially in areas where virus prevalence is high.

Although vaccinated people with a breakthrough infection are much less likely to become severely ill than unvaccinated, [B]the new study shows that they(vaccinated) can be carrying similar amounts of virus and could potentially spread the virus to other people. [/B]This study did not directly address how easily vaccinated people can get infected with SARS-CoV-2, or how readily someone with a breakthrough infection can transmit the virus.”[/quote]

..

This has turned into the pandemic for the unvaccinated. Life is pretty much back to normal here except for the annoying masks indoors.

I gotta say shit sucks for the unvaccinated tho. Can't work, can't go to restaurants, can't travel etc.

I'm all for vaccines, but separating the population is stupid. I feel for you guys.

[QUOTE=hiphopanonymous;14471412]My understanding could be mistaken but my understanding was the vaccinated do not catch and play host - therefore do not spread - Covid as profusely or as easily as those who do not get vaccinated. Some with the vaccine certainly can and do catch it to infectious and even lethal levels yes these are those break through cases that the news loves to talk about - but the numbers are far far reduced by comparison to the unvaccinated. Therefore, in a perfect world, if everyone truly cared about dropping numbers with simple measures things like a (totally free) vaccine would be a no brainer. But my other point is - people don't care to do the right thing. So they don't.[/QUOTE]

This may have been true with alpha but it's not the case with delta. I mean there are places with very high vaccination rates that are having their highest cases to date.

I think there are people who are certainly selfish when it comes to there health but this is true for lots of things including the flu. And again i don't think most people go about it with the mind set they don't care. They go about it with the mindset that it's a risk that we as a society chose to take. Up until covid most of us have done it with the flu. The flu infects millions and kills tens of thousands of people a year. It kills just as many kids as covid but in general only 1/3 of the population gets vaccinated for it. Nobody wears masks. Nobody stays 6 feet apart even though they could be asymptomatic have it and spread it. I'm sure your guilty of this i know i was. How is that any different?

[QUOTE=Bronbron23;14471468]This may have been true with alpha but it's not the case with delta. I mean there are places with very high vaccination rates that are having their highest cases to date.

I think there are people who are certainly selfish when it comes to there health but this is true for lots of things including the flu. And again i don't think most people go about it with the mind set they don't care. They go about it with the mindset that it's a risk that we as a society chose to take. Up until covid most of us have done it with the flu. The flu infects millions and kills tens of thousands of people a year. It kills just as many kids as covid but in general only 1/3 of the population gets vaccinated for it. Nobody wears masks. Nobody stays 6 feet apart even though they could be asymptomatic have it and spread it. I'm sure your guilty of this i know i was. How is that any different?[/QUOTE]

You have an antiviral drugs that can kill the flu inside the human body with trillion cells. Nothing so far with Covid though Pfizer drug is promising.

[QUOTE=tpols;14471320]People in this thread talking about not getting a vaccine with no long term human clinical trials that doesn't prevent transmission and whose side effects are not fully understood yet is like shooting guns in the air at people. :lol :facepalm

Cant make this shit up. Straight up retarded.[/QUOTE]

Vaccines approval process is at least 5 years. Considering the circumstances, there’s no way the world will wait for at least 5 years to unleash the vaccine.

[QUOTE=Rooster;14471496]Vaccines approval process is at least 5 years. Considering the circumstances, there’s no way the world will wait for at least 5 years to unleash the vaccine.[/QUOTE]

You are right. It's easier to just cut corners instead, falsify the efficacy data and unblind the patients during the trial phase to get the Emergency use authorization as soon as possible [url]https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635[/url]

[QUOTE] . A regional director who was employed at the research organisation Ventavia Research Group has told The BMJ that the company falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trained vaccinators, and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported in Pfizer’s pivotal phase III trial. Staff who conducted quality control checks were overwhelmed by the volume of problems they were finding.After repeatedly notifying Ventavia of these problems, the regional director, Brook Jackson, emailed a complaint to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Ventavia fired her later the same day. Jackson has provided The BMJ with dozens of internal company documents, photos, audio recordings, and emails. [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=hiphopanonymous;14471293]Don't give a shit whether you've got a vaccine or not tbh.

[B]But just as a conceptual exercise: by OP's logic just shoot a gun randomly into the air. It's dangerous to others not the shooter so who cares and it's not like the shooter was intending to do any harm as they were just being random and aiming for the air not people.[/b]

A bit more exaggerated then vaccinating the healthy young folks in question but similar concept of that it doesn't affect the person being negligent only potentially random people near by. What we do can sometimes affect the safety of others and probably we should attempt to do the right things in those situations. Leaving the discretion up to the individuals as a society is also a fail waiting to happen by the way. Too many people simply refuse to do the "right thing" I don't even mean like 5-10 percent or less I mean about 50 percent lol. But I understand the devils advocate to that too, I mean do we really want more instructions or laws mandating things? Most people want to resist that naturally. Even though it's funny nobody complains about stop signs or drivers licenses. But whatever, the vaccine offered me protection. I got it. My close circle got it. The rest of the world can do what they like including OP.[/QUOTE]
This. It's actually called stray bullet but as long as op himself is safe, he doesn't seem to care if the others may get afflicted no matter how healthy he is lmao. Not sure if he's being insensitive here or something. And regarding how freedom became limited due to the pandemic, yes it sucks a lot. But as more folks get fully vaccinated while time goes on, restrictions will start to ease up. Hopefully, by q1 of 2023 everything will be closely back to normal, especially if it's really true that the virus has already reached its peak by q2 to q3 of this year.

[QUOTE=Rooster;14471496]Vaccines approval process is at least 5 years. Considering the circumstances, there’s no way the world will wait for at least 5 years to unleash the vaccine.[/QUOTE]

A lot of that is paperwork and triple-testing in ever-growing populations. I hope the vaccine and medical research study process gets more streamlined after this for future studies.

[QUOTE=Bronbron23;14471356]The lower age group are contributing to less than 10% that's not significant enough to mandate it for that age group. Your basically running your argument on the one life saved argument which isn't a good one. We except minimal risks all the time. This is no different.

And again with reducing infection and transmission point it's very minimal. It dosn't significantly reduce it. We don't apply this to the flu which kills just as many kids and kills tens of thousands and infects tens of millions.

I don't see this same concern for minimal risk for the flu or heart disease or type 2 diabetes. Combined these thinga are way more likely to kill or hospitalize people. What's next are we gonna force people on what and how to eat? Why no outrage for all these unhealthy fat f*cks that overwhelme the hospitals every year. Why no outrage for people spreading the flu which kills just as many kids as covid?

What's common sense is that the world is full of things that pose an extremely low risk to our safety and survival. We except and live with these risks every day because living in fear of things that's minimal risk is no way to live your life. Alot of people have let the media and government scare them into being scared of something that they otherwise wouldn't have been if not for all the fear mongering and now people like you are acting irrational.[/QUOTE]

Even only at 10% it's a significant contribution. And the number will differ from country to country depending on population age, lockdown policy etc. Equating a global pandemic to diabetes is...strange to say the least. It shows that one does not have a good grasp on what makes it dangerous. If the vaccine reduce infection and accelerate viral clearance, wouldn't that mean less chance for you to transmit it to your family? This is just common sense.

[QUOTE=PistonsFan#21;14471503]You are right. It's easier to just cut corners instead, falsify the efficacy data and unblind the patients during the trial phase to get the Emergency use authorization as soon as possible [URL]https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635[/URL][/QUOTE]

LMAO, you seem to be too naive or never invested in a biotech company. A lot of things can happen in Phase 3.

But the numbers don’t lie, Pfizer has poor efficacy after 6 months with 76% and also only against 42% against Delta. But overall, that’s pretty good result for a vaccine.

Let me put this way, if Pfizer said their oral pill works against Covid overwhelmingly like 90%, are you going to wait 8-10 years process for FDA to approve this? Or you are just an anti vaccine? Or if BioN Tech produced a cancer vaccine , do you want all the cancer patients to wait 5-8 years?

[QUOTE=iamgine;14471529]Even only at 10% it's a significant contribution. And the number will differ from country to country depending on population age, lockdown policy etc. Equating a global pandemic to diabetes is...strange to say the least. It shows that one does not have a good grasp on what makes it dangerous. If the vaccine reduce infection and accelerate viral clearance, wouldn't that mean less chance for you to transmit it to your family? This is just common sense.[/QUOTE]

Will we ever know how much it actually reduces infection? CDC couldn't keep up (or wanted to take the attention away from it) with all the breakthrough cases so they stopped tracking that data and only focused on breakthrough cases that lead to hospitalization or death since May 1st.

In Israel and the UK where the governments are more transparent with their data we see that most hospitalizations and deaths are among the fully vaccinated. There was an official document from the UK government that showed 63% of the delta death since February until October were among the fully vaccinated. There is also video and audio evidence that the data was falsified during the clinical trial for Pfizer.

Common sense would be to question what else they are hiding or lying about.

[QUOTE=Rooster;14471560]LMAO, you seem to be too naive or never invested in a biotech company. A lot of things can happen in Phase 3.

But the numbers don’t lie, Pfizer has poor efficacy after 6 months with 76% and also only against 42% against Delta. But overall, that’s pretty good result for a vaccine.

Let me put this way, if Pfizer said their oral pill works against Covid overwhelmingly like 90%, are you going to wait 8-10 years process for FDA to approve this? Or you are just an anti vaccine? [B]Or if BioN Tech produced a cancer vaccine , do you want all the cancer patients to wait 5-8 years?[/B][/QUOTE]

It depends. Are we talking about a vaccine for a cancer with a 99.7% survival rate that will not prevent you from getting it? Hypothetically speaking here obviously.

[QUOTE=Axe;14471513]This. It's actually called stray bullet but as long as op himself is safe, he doesn't seem to care if the others may get afflicted no matter how healthy he is lmao. Not sure if he's being insensitive here or something. And regarding how freedom became limited due to the pandemic, yes it sucks a lot. But as more folks get fully vaccinated while time goes on, restrictions will start to ease up. Hopefully, by q1 of 2023 everything will be closely back to normal, especially if it's really true that the virus has already reached its peak by q2 to q3 of this year.[/QUOTE]

Don't think you read what i was saying. I realize that i can spread the virus but a vaccinated person is just as likely to spreading it also. This is why the mandates make zero sense. Either lock everyone down or don't lock anyone down.

[QUOTE=iamgine;14471529]Even only at 10% it's a significant contribution. And the number will differ from country to country depending on population age, lockdown policy etc. Equating a global pandemic to diabetes is...strange to say the least. It shows that one does not have a good grasp on what makes it dangerous. If the vaccine reduce infection and accelerate viral clearance, wouldn't that mean less chance for you to transmit it to your family? This is just common sense.[/QUOTE]

It dosn't though. The 10% was referring to hospitalizations for that age group. Transmission is pretty much the same. And common sense would be that my family and people around are vaccinated and protected so they don't have to worry about me or other vaccinated and vaccinated hurting them. Isn't that why all the vaccinated are allowed roaming around freely even though a bunch of them have covid and are spreading it all over the place? It's because they're protected right?

[QUOTE=PistonsFan#21;14471574]It depends. Are we talking about a vaccine for a cancer with a 99.7% survival rate that will not prevent you from getting it? Hypothetically speaking here obviously.[/QUOTE]

LMAO so you rather take a Horse paste against 99.7% survival rate than a vaccine that can end cancer.

Vaccines have eradicated a lot of diseases.

What has anti vaccine crew ever contributed to our society? :roll: This is like a cult on a fool’s errand.

[QUOTE=Bronbron23;14471578]It dosn't though. The 10% was referring to hospitalizations for that age group. Transmission is pretty much the same. And common sense would be that my family and people around are vaccinated and protected so they don't have to worry about me or other vaccinated and vaccinated hurting them. Isn't that why all the vaccinated are allowed roaming around freely even though a bunch of them have covid and are spreading it all over the place? It's because they're protected right?[/QUOTE]

UK yearlong study have a good answer.

The study, which enrolled 621 participants, found that of 205 household contacts of people with Delta COVID-19 infection, 38% of household contacts who were unvaccinated went on to test positive, compared to 25% of vaccinated contacts.


Those who were inoculated cleared the virus more quickly and had milder cases, while unvaccinated household members were more likely to suffer from severe disease and hospitalization.

So many naive idealist in this place. Do you actually think this about saving lives? Do you really think the goverment gives 2 shits about the people? The same goverment that profits off of cigarettes, alcohol and opioids that causes countless deaths and hospitalizations? The same goverment that does dick all to end human trafficking. The same goverment that sends our young men and women to foreign lands to fight and die for the goverments greed?

I guess the goverment suddenly grew a conscious over night:facepalm

[QUOTE=Rooster;14471583]LMAO so you rather take a Horse paste against 99.7% survival rate than a vaccine that can end cancer.

Vaccines have eradicated a lot of diseases.

What has anti vaccine crew ever contributed to our society? :roll: This is like a cult on a fool’s errand.[/QUOTE]

Why would i take horse paste? The survival rate for healthy people is 99.7% without any type of treatment.

42% efficacy for a vaccine is trash by any standards. I don't think we eradicated any type of diseases with that level of efficacy. Imagine sending your vaccinated kids to school and telling them there is 58% chance that they get polio, small pox and measles :lol

[QUOTE=Rooster;14471584]UK yearlong study have a good answer.

The study, which enrolled 621 participants, found that of 205 household contacts of people with Delta COVID-19 infection, 38% of household contacts who were unvaccinated went on to test positive, compared to 25% of vaccinated contacts.


Those who were inoculated cleared the virus more quickly and had milder cases, while unvaccinated household members were more likely to suffer from severe disease and hospitalization.[/QUOTE]

Tbh you lost me at 621 participant's but can you post the study?

[QUOTE=PistonsFan#21;14471589]Why would i take horse paste? The survival rate for healthy people is 99.7% without any type of treatment.

42% efficacy for a vaccine is trash by any standards. I don't think we eradicated any type of diseases with that level of efficacy. Imagine sending your vaccinated kids to school and telling them there is 58% chance that they get polio, small pox and measles :lol[/QUOTE]

LMAO Y’all musta forgot. You rolling hard advocating for Ivermectin, your horse paste treatment for Covid brah.

Moderna has 72% efficacy btw but it don’t matter right. Just buy all those natural products that ospteopathic physician like Mercola sell then maybe you’re free from any form of disease. LMAO.

Again what has anti vaccine contributed to the society brah

Pleade enlighten me brah.

[QUOTE=Bronbron23;14471594]Tbh you lost me at 621 participant's but can you post the study?[/QUOTE]

[URL]https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00648-4/fulltext[/URL]

[QUOTE=PistonsFan#21;14471589]Why would i take horse paste? The survival rate for healthy people is 99.7% without any type of treatment.

42% efficacy for a vaccine is trash by any standards. I don't think we eradicated any type of diseases with that level of efficacy. Imagine sending your vaccinated kids to school and telling them there is 58% chance that they get polio, small pox and measles :lol[/QUOTE]

Now, what if you tell those same kids that they are unlikely to need hospitalization from polio, smallpox, and measles if they are vaccinated compared to their unvaccinated classmates, who may get a lot sicker if they do get those diseases? Is that vaccine still trash then??

[QUOTE=Rooster;14471601][URL]https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00648-4/fulltext[/URL][/QUOTE]

Ok yeah i remember seeing some stuff on that. The general takeaway from that specific study though was the vaccines aren't effective at significantly reducing the spread [url]https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/policy/healthcare/579068-vaccinated-just-as-likely-to-spread-delta-variant-as-unvaccinated-study%3famp[/url]

Here is a larger one from uk that pretty much has the same takeaway. [url]https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/world/article-people-who-are-fully-vaccinated-have-high-potential-of-spreading-covid/[/url]

Both suggest the vaccinated are slightly less likely to get infected but that it's not significant and that the vaccines aren't useful in significantly reducing the spread which was the point i was making from jump.

This isn't what the government, media has been saying and it's not what most vaccinated people have been saying. They've been saying we have to get everyone vaccinated so we can stop the spread even though the "science" says that's not the case.

So again i'll ask. if the vaccines don't significantly reduce the spread and young people, healthy people and those wirh natural immunity aren't the ones responsible for overwhelming the hospitals why are they mandating these vaccines?

[QUOTE=bladefd;14471603]Now, what if you tell those same kids that they are unlikely to need hospitalization from polio, smallpox, and measles if they are vaccinated compared to their unvaccinated classmates, who may get a lot sicker if they do get those diseases? Is that vaccine still trash then??[/QUOTE]

The vaccines aren't trash bro. Children just aren't at a significant enough risk from covid to warrant mandating them. That's not why the government wants kids vaccinated btw. According to them the purpose of vaccinated children is to significantly reduce the spread but this logic has already been proven illogical by the science That's coming out.

[QUOTE=Rooster;14471599]LMAO Y’all musta forgot. You rolling hard advocating for Ivermectin, your horse paste treatment for Covid brah.

Moderna has 72% efficacy btw but it don’t matter right. Just buy all those natural products that ospteopathic physician like Mercola sell then maybe you’re free from any form of disease. LMAO.

Again what has anti vaccine contributed to the society brah

Pleade enlighten me brah.[/QUOTE]

I think you got me confused with someone else, i never advocated for any horse paste treatment :confusedshrug:

72% is still not good enough. That's like a B- . I like my vaccine A+ grade, you know kinda like the small pox vaccine in middle school where after you got it you could play with any other kids even if they were unvaccinated and you wouldn't have to social distance in fear of catching the disease from them.

[QUOTE=bladefd;14471603]Now, what if you tell those same kids that they are unlikely to need hospitalization from polio, smallpox, and measles if they are vaccinated compared to their unvaccinated classmates, who may get a lot sicker if they do get those diseases? Is that vaccine still trash then??[/QUOTE]

You mean comparing a vaccine that gives you actual immunity (meaning you won't get infected and spread it to others) to a vaccine that will simply lessen your symptoms and doesn't prevent you from spreading it to others? I would say the latter is probably better than nothing but definitely subpar.

[QUOTE=Bronbron23;14471575]Don't think you read what i was saying. I realize that i can spread the virus but a vaccinated person is just as likely to spreading it also. This is why the mandates make zero sense. Either lock everyone down or don't lock anyone down.[/QUOTE]
A vaccinated person can spread it but if they test positive tho, at least they won't be hospitalized so easily and they'll only need a few days of quarantine to recover from it. And the world can't endure any more prolonged lockdowns because billions of money are lost everyday because of this shit. Take a look at those freaking airlines. A lot of them have become bankrupt or just downscaled last year and those who are left aren't operating at a 100% capacity yet. Same thing for other types of transportation firms, along with restaurants, cinemas, hotels, spas, theme parks, etc. Hoping that everything will open and easen up next year or so as more people become vaccinated at least.

Good question.

The official narrative is that the vaccine will reduce your chances of being hospitalized and dying.

What is the absolute risk reduction in hospitalization and death after becoming vaccinated? Anyone know?

[QUOTE=Axe;14471758]A vaccinated person can spread it but if they test positive tho, at least they won't be hospitalized so easily and they'll only need a few days of quarantine to recover from it. And the world can't endure any more prolonged lockdowns because billions of money are lost everyday because of this shit. Take a look at those freaking airlines. A lot of them have become bankrupt or just downscaled last year and those who are left aren't operating at a 100% capacity yet. Same thing for other types of transportation firms, along with restaurants, cinemas, hotels, spas, theme parks, etc. Hoping that everything will open and easen up next year or so as more people become vaccinated at least.[/QUOTE]

Yes i agree it protects the individual who takes it but this isn't significant for everyone. It's not significant for people with natural antibodies. It's not significant for children and it's not significant for healthy young adults. It is significant for older people and unhealthy people. For this reason i don't think they should be mandated.

And i wasn't suggesting they should shut down. Shutting down was just one of the 2 options. My point was we should just get back to life as normal. Better educate people on who should get the vaccine and why. Also educate people on better health and lifestyle choices. Be more transparent and allow for open conversation. Stop demonizing people. If they had of done this from jump just as many people would of got vaccinated. Probably more would have. Alot of "antivaxers" aren't actually anti-vaccine they just don't like the lies or incompetence from the government, cdc and media.

[QUOTE=Cleverness;14471793]Good question.

The official narrative is that the vaccine will reduce your chances of being hospitalized and dying.

What is the absolute risk reduction in hospitalization and death after becoming vaccinated? Anyone know?[/QUOTE]

I think it does for alot of people. This is a pandemic of the old and healthy and there's alot of old and unhealthy people out there. I don't think it does for alot of groups though. Children, healthy younger adults and those with natural immunity don't get significant protection from vaccines compared to side effects from it. This is my issue with the mandates. They're trying to vaccinate everyone for a virus that for the most part effects certain groups. It be like trying to make children and healthy young adults take heart medication because lots if older and unhealthy people are dying and being hospitalized due to heart disease. It makes no sense.

[QUOTE=PistonsFan#21;14471709]I think you got me confused with someone else, i never advocated for any horse paste treatment :confusedshrug:

72% is still not good enough. That's like a B- . I like my vaccine A+ grade, you know kinda like the small pox vaccine in middle school where after you got it you could play with any other kids even if they were unvaccinated and you wouldn't have to social distance in fear of catching the disease from them.[/QUOTE]

LMAO so if 72% is caliberated in weeks time and mass produced in a month for emerging variant , is booster justification enough. Or you gonna ignore Moderna efficacy of over 90%, prevent severe illness by 95% and deaths by 100% on Alpha variant. LOL

[QUOTE=Bronbron23;14471615]Ok yeah i remember seeing some stuff on that. The general takeaway from that specific study though was the vaccines aren't effective at significantly reducing the spread [URL]https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/policy/healthcare/579068-vaccinated-just-as-likely-to-spread-delta-variant-as-unvaccinated-study%3famp[/URL]

Here is a larger one from uk that pretty much has the same takeaway. [URL]https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/world/article-people-who-are-fully-vaccinated-have-high-potential-of-spreading-covid/[/URL]

Both suggest the vaccinated are slightly less likely to get infected but that it's not significant and that the vaccines aren't useful in significantly reducing the spread which was the point i was making from jump.

This isn't what the government, media has been saying and it's not what most vaccinated people have been saying. They've been saying we have to get everyone vaccinated so we can stop the spread even though the "science" says that's not the case.

So again i'll ask. if the vaccines don't significantly reduce the spread and young people, healthy people and those wirh natural immunity aren't the ones responsible for overwhelming the hospitals why are they mandating these vaccines?[/QUOTE]

Pfizer 92% to 78% is significant effifacy, Astra not so much and those 2 vaccines are primary utilized by UK. It’s the Delta that Pfizer has poor result. If anything the study proved that booster is necessary especially for immunocompromised. The mRNA can be easily produced and calibrated.

Natural immunity works but in order to withstand the test of time, those presumed healthy individuals gonna have to be tested regularly and ideally quarterly antibody testing to confirm their protection dues not wean off. This is not cost effective nor sustainable for the long run Asymptomatic individuals infects the most , the R which is around 3-4 before we even have outbreaks here. Like I said 40% of Americans and at least 10% are elderly , we are not the most ideal nation to take the risk.

[QUOTE=Bronbron23;14472024]I think it does for alot of people. This is a pandemic of the old and healthy and there's alot of old and unhealthy people out there. I don't think it does for alot of groups though. Children, healthy younger adults and those with natural immunity don't get significant protection from vaccines compared to side effects from it. This is my issue with the mandates. They're trying to vaccinate everyone for a virus that for the most part effects certain groups. It be like trying to make children and healthy young adults take heart medication because lots if older and unhealthy people are dying and being hospitalized due to heart disease. It makes no sense.[/QUOTE]

LMAO the data on July to August spikes , hospitalization was mostly over 90% unvaccinated. Kaiser study also validated the vaccines preventing deaths and severe illness. Let me put it this way, Vaccines are not all or nothing solution but it’s the most effective in managing the risk.

[QUOTE=Rooster;14472057]Pfizer 92% to 78% is significant effifacy, Astra not so much and those 2 vaccines are primary utilized by UK. It’s the Delta that Pfizer has poor result. If anything the study proved that booster is necessary especially for immunocompromised. The mRNA can be easily produced and calibrated.

Natural immunity works but in order to withstand the test of time, those presumed healthy individuals gonna have to be tested regularly and ideally quarterly antibody testing to confirm their protection dues not wean off. This is not cost effective nor sustainable for the long run Asymptomatic individuals infects the most , the R which is around 3-4 before we even have outbreaks here. Like I said 40% of Americans and at least 10% are elderly , we are not the most ideal nation to take the risk.[/QUOTE]

It's only delta around though. Aplha is gone.

And the vaccinated that had their jabs don't have to get tested for antibodies even though natural immunity is better?

It should at least be an option and if price is a problem the individual should have an option to pay for their own test.

[QUOTE=Rooster;14472065]LMAO the data on July to August spikes , hospitalization was mostly over 90% unvaccinated. Kaiser study also validated the vaccines preventing deaths and severe illness. Let me put it this way, Vaccines are not all or nothing solution but it’s the most effective in managing the risk.[/QUOTE]

Yes for those who are risk dude that's my point. They coukd just vaccinate those who are high risk and it would yield the same desired outcome. Trying to vaccinate children, healthy young adults and those who have natural immunity are already protected.

[QUOTE=Bronbron23;14472112]It's only delta around though. Aplha is gone.

And the vaccinated that had their jabs don't have to get tested for antibodies even though natural immunity is better?

It should at least be an option and if price is a problem the individual should have an option to pay for their own test.[/QUOTE]

Look brah, virus is unpredictable. New variant will continue to emerge and new problems will arise. The flexibility of the mRNA tech is itÂ’s easy to calibrate and mass produce it within months to tackle any variant.

if thereÂ’s any breakthrough cases for vaccinated, antibody/antigen test and viral loads are being implemented. Vaccines provide immunity., thatÂ’s already proven. Natural immunity, thatÂ’s needs to be proven by antibody testing.

But if you doing the comparison from vaccine to unvaccinated, reviewing scores of research studies and its own unpublished data, most experts found that both infection-induced and vaccine-induced immunity are durable for at least six months — but that vaccines are more consistent in their protection and offer a huge boost in antibodies for people previously infected.

LMAO about giving the unvaccinated individuals and sustaining the compliance of weekly testing and routine antibody and keep PAYING. This is like thinking all people will behave accordingly. If mask is an issue, i donÂ’t see this as sustainable solution brah.

[QUOTE=Bronbron23;14472021]Yes i agree it protects the individual who takes it but this isn't significant for everyone. It's not significant for people with natural antibodies. It's not significant for children and it's not significant for healthy young adults. It is significant for older people and unhealthy people. For this reason i don't think they should be mandated.

And i wasn't suggesting they should shut down. Shutting down was just one of the 2 options. My point was we should just get back to life as normal. Better educate people on who should get the vaccine and why. Also educate people on better health and lifestyle choices. Be more transparent and allow for open conversation. Stop demonizing people. If they had of done this from jump just as many people would of got vaccinated. Probably more would have. Alot of "antivaxers" aren't actually anti-vaccine they just don't like the lies or incompetence from the government, cdc and media.[/QUOTE]
I understand you but different mandates in different places make this shit so confusing tbh. Sometimes when you go somewhere, there are times when you have prepared your requirements but guards or officers in checkpoints, airports, etc. would not examine them meticulously and let you pass through already immediately once they see you have them. Sometimes that's all it takes. Those who are fully vaccinated should have more privileges for the time being but you know, that's not the case at all. They can still treat them as unvaccinated.