We know the vax is compromising the immune system of the hosts after X months and it makes them more susceptible to infection - Therefore more susceptible to spread.
The Coronavirus, not the beer
- Thread starter Runnin
- Start date
We know the vax is compromising the immune system of the hosts after X months and it makes them more susceptible to infection - Therefore more susceptible to spread.
Anyone who is arguing for someone who isn't at-risk to take the vaccine just doesn't have a clue as to what they are talking about.
The science is as settled as its going to be at this present point in time on that factor.
Natural immunity is by far the way to go and IS BETTER FOR REDUCED COMMUNITY SPREAD.
The science is as settled as its going to be at this present point in time on that factor.
Natural immunity is by far the way to go and IS BETTER FOR REDUCED COMMUNITY SPREAD.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
The available evidence is overwhelming that vaccines are highly effective (over 90%) against outcomes such as death and hospitalization and somewhat effective (40-50%) at reducing transmission. ymmv
But lets say vaccines reduce transmission by 10%. I'd say that makes them worth incentivizing (or horrors mandating).
Schools currently mandate a vaccine (varicella) for a disease (chickenpox) that is very mild in its effects on the school age population. The benefits of this accrue to other groups. Infants below age 1 whose immune systems do not respond to the vaccine. Pregnant women. The unborn children of pregnant women. The immunocompromised. It is an example of a mandate that impinges upon a population that receives little or no benefit from the vaccine. But there is a social benefit because it reduces the incidence of chickenpox generally and among vulnerable groups in particular. It saves a relatively small number of lives. A couple thousand per year in this country. Is it a form of oppression AND tyranny to require school children to take a vaccine that doesn't benefit them but benefits other groups such as infants, pregnant women, unborn children and the immunocompromised. I'd be interested to hear what kind of take my fweedom-loving libertarian friends have on the issue of the varicella school mandate.
I'd also like to toss out the issue of society mandating that parents provide for the education of their children (whether through schools or home schooling). There is no fweedom of choice in modern societies for parents who have a general objection to education. The majority has trampled upon the rights of the minority of parents who don't believe in education at all. What sayeth libertarians about this? I know y'all favor school choice, which I think is an attractive position with which I generally agree. What about the fweedom to opt out of education entirely? Isn't it a form of tyranny to require (mandate!) some form of education for all children? Where do we draw the line along this slippery slope? It seems to me fweedom is not an absolute. We constantly have to weigh these various impingements against fweedom against social benefits that accrue from such impingements. And yeah, reasonable people will disagree about where to draw the line on such matters.
Last edited:
Lets ignore that Swedish researchers identified that the mRNA converts to DNA and sets in the body.
Nobody has any clue what this tech will do long term.
Pretending otherwise is just a tell for your ignorance.
acesfull86
Well-known member
For me, the reduction in transmission would need to be near 100% to mandate it. We mandate the polio vaccine and we haven’t had a new case originate in our country since the 1970’s. That passes my test. Conversely, we don’t mandate the yearly flu vaccine. We give people the “fweedom” to weigh the risks. The results on the field this far when it comes to the COVID vaccine tell me it should be treated in the flu vaccine camp, not the polio vaccine camp. It hasn’t come close to clearing the very high bar I would have to mandate people take it.
DELTA!!!!
acesfull86
Well-known member
In the early days of the vaccine, I was a vocal supporter of governments incentivizing people to get it. Willing to take an “L” on that, for two reasons. One, I’m not convinced the positive externality created by vaccination was as large as initially hoped. Two, I underestimated how the presence of an incentive would push some on the fence to be even more hesitant. Maybe the incentive systems could’ve been designed in a more optimal way, but I’m skeptical.
Tapate50
Well-known member
Shingles, which can disable certain parts of the at risk population is NOT mandated as far as I know.
Does the Tetanus shot help protect the spread?
How about the media not take bribes from the government to push it?
Jaw
It's OVER 5,000!
I still think the vaccines are a huge net positive. That doesn't make them the best option for everyone. I'll raise your vaccine L with those I took on masks and wiping down groceries.
acesfull86
Well-known member
Here you go Nsacpi - Just one quick one that I found from 04/11
I've been looking for data on the prevalence of various conditions in people dying of covid. Credit to Mississippi's Department of Health for publishing these numbers in an easy to understand graphical format.
Looks like obesity is the fifth or sixth most common condition behind high blood pressure, heart disease, diabetes and lung disease. About the same as neurological conditions and renal disease.
The low none noted number is also of interest.
Here is another from 09/06
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
It is true it is not the dominant factor in explaining differences across countries. Look at Scandinavia. Similar obesity rates across countries. Much high death rate in Sweden. So it aint obesity.
Man - YOu truly don't understand how to analyze data at all.
Fascinating. Go look at the mistakes Sweden made early on and then their record afterwards.
It is undoubtedly the first/second/third/fourth/fifth most important factor. To say anything otherwise just screams stupidity.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Covid is worse than the flu (obviously from the excess deaths data). But yeah the vaccine is not as effective as for polio and some other diseases.
My view is people should voluntarily take it. I've also advocated strongly for providing sticks and carrots. I very much like what Delta did in raising health insurance premia for the unvaccinated. Through their choices the unvaccinated are contributing to a variety of excess costs to society. We socialize health care costs. So the approach Delta took should probably have been done on a societal basis. Since everyone prefers carrots to sticks from a political point of view people who get the vaccine should receive a generous financial reward. And those who don't want to get vaccinated can enjoy their fweedom.
sturg33
I
You were just celebrating a braves coach losing his job because he didn't take it