|
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by ArthurBrit
(Post 13103733)
If someone entered a coma from receiving the vaccine (has happened) can I argue that they shouldn't use the hospital because they injected it into themselves... (This is similar to how people feel about heroine users).
There's always multiple perspectives and like I said I'm truly not campaigning against the vaccine, I am vaccinated, I do want people to get vaccinated but we can do this without the bigotries. No one is injecting themselves with covid vaccines. Toying with the emotions of celebrated women is not a trifling matter, I agree, JK Rowling has my sympathy and support, but it's hardly relevant here. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by ArthurBrit
(Post 13103734)
and it doesn't matter that your belief is impacting on someone else.
Vaccination being the right thing to do isn't a matter of belief, polio hasn't been stamped out because people believe it's gone, it's actually gone. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by BristolUK
(Post 13103647)
Fewer people dying than currently sounds like a good idea.
|
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 13103737)
Vaccination being the right thing to do isn't a matter of belief, polio hasn't been stamped out because people believe it's gone, it's actually gone.
If the vaccine stopped those that had had it dying, and had all of those that hadn't had it, after catching C-19, died, your comparison of them would be more valid. Unfortunately, the fact is that the vaccine has not prevented all of those that have had it from dying, nor have all of those unvaccinated that have caught it died. I am sure you are aware of the statistics. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 13103737)
Vaccination being the right thing to do isn't a matter of belief, polio hasn't been stamped out because people believe it's gone, it's actually gone.
|
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 13103745)
How many deaths would be acceptable, or are we to wait until no one in the world is dying of C-19?
So much is made of the death toll but, it really isn't all that bad. What would be more concerning is if it were young kids dying and we're losing people that should have 50+ years of life left. Reality is we're losing people who are over 60, the majority of which would pass with or without COVID and they all add to that 18,000,000 number. The actual number of years lost due to COVID really isn't that high, as terrible as it sounds. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 13103746)
The polio vaccine stops its effects. Not one of the C-19 vaccines does. When was the last time you had a polio booster?
If the vaccine stopped those that had had it dying, and had all of those that hadn't had it, after catching C-19, died, your comparison of them would be more valid. Unfortunately, the fact is that the vaccine has not prevented all of those that have had it from dying, nor have all of those unvaccinated that have caught it died. I am sure you are aware of the statistics. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by ArthurBrit
(Post 13103749)
The difference is that this vaccine will not irradiate covid. People are not vilified or discriminated against if they haven't received the polio vaccine. You wont lose your job over it for sure (unless you're in certain types of healthcare, where they check for these things).
|
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 13103756)
You can't go to school without a full set of vaccinations so the idea of getting a job is moot.
|
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 13103755)
I suggest that the covid vaccines are a work in progress. Eventually there will be a vaccine that works completely, in the interim we have to go with what there is and that's harm reduction.
|
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by ArthurBrit
(Post 13103757)
I wonder if there's this thing called home or foreign education that could bypass that...No can't think of one.
|
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 13103761)
Giving up education for one's children. damning them to poverty, for the sake avoiding vaccinations seems perverse to me. The state should probably intervene.
I have a foster child who is moving into independent living on the weekend and the social worker (who specializes in these transitions) didn't realize that a moving van might be required. I also hardly think that home/private/foreign schooling is always worse than public education. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by ArthurBrit
(Post 13103765)
Trust me I'm a foster parent...The last thing you want is the state to intervene over trivial matters.
|
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 13103767)
Endangering the health of the community and depriving the child of a formal education are not, in my view, trivial matters.
In terms of education there are many who successfully home school, private or foreign education is also considered formal it's just not the norm. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by ArthurBrit
(Post 13103769)
If preventing the spread of natural illnesses is such a big issue for you, please top yourself cause you do it more than you know. Again, this is about people's right to choose whether to put an untested (now it's tested) and undocumented (Pfizer has released a redacted document) vaccine into there body. Whether their choice is for religious, scientific or even gut feel reasons, it's not our job to discriminate against them. It's our job to educate them with actual science, actual data. Not politicizing it.
|
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by ArthurBrit
(Post 13103734)
and it doesn't matter that your belief is impacting on someone else.
|
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 13103755)
I suggest that the covid vaccines are a work in progress. Eventually there will be a vaccine that works completely, in the interim we have to go with what there is and that's harm reduction.
I accept that one has to survive having the virus, but for most of the population, that is not an issue. I accept that, from a moral perspective, you believe that they should be burnt at the stake but, from a from a, "What current risk do they pose to society from a C-19 perspective?" they are no greater risk than someone that is double vaccinated. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 13103787)
Maybe. But there is lots of evidence now that having the virus protects one as well as the vaccine does, and for a longer period ....
The source I posted was a study from California only that showed that those infected and recovered had less waning of protection than those vaccinated but as was pointed out by the researchers the recoveries from covid were more recent than the vaccinations so the latter protection had more time to wane. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by BristolUK
(Post 13103788)
Again, you should be providing sources for that just as I previously supplied the source for a study that was interpreted by some exactly as you state but which actually said no such thing.
The source I posted was a study from California only that showed that those infected and recovered had less waning of protection than those vaccinated but as was pointed out by the researchers the recoveries from covid were more recent than the vaccinations so the latter protection had more time to wane. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 13103791)
Insofar as what I was saying above is concerned, the point is moot unless, of course, you are able to produce data that shows that those whose immunity was acquired through infection, lose that protection faster than those whose immunity was acquired through vaccination.
I posted the CDC research previously that showed your claim to be inaccurate. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 13103787)
I accept that, from a moral perspective, you believe that they should be burnt at the stake but, from a from a, "What current risk do they pose to society from a C-19 perspective?" they are no greater risk than someone that is double vaccinated. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by BristolUK
(Post 13103794)
I haven't made such a claim. You made the claim that immunity through infection lasted longer than that provided by vaccination. You did this here, just now and also in the other thread. Just because I dispute your claim does not mean I claim the opposite.
I posted the CDC research previously that showed your claim to be inaccurate. I suggest that it does not invalidate its findings for the reason you wish to put forward but, in any event, it is completely irrelevant to the main point I was making above. It is relatively simple to find opinions and comments that support a whole range of views on what the actual data actually means. That is not data, it is an opinion. There is also lots of research (mentioned in that piece) that deals with the waning effect of the vaccine and how it compares with immunity acquired through infection. That is the reason why boosters are being recommended but, as I have said, that is not particularly relevant to the main point I was making. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 13103930)
This is a link to the CDC's research, not a journalist's interpretation of that research:
Even your link says vaccination remains the safest strategy to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infections and associated complications this analysis did not ascertain receipt of additional or booster COVID-19 vaccine doses and was conducted before many persons were eligible or had received additional or booster vaccine doses, which have been shown to confer additional protection. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by BristolUK
(Post 13103939)
It's a total waste of time discussing anything with you. Try ArthurBrit, mate. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by ArthurBrit
(Post 13103733)
If someone entered a coma from receiving the vaccine (has happened) can I argue that they shouldn't use the hospital because they injected it into themselves... (This is similar to how people feel about heroine users).
. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by BristolUK
(Post 13103939)
The quotes were direct from the research and not a journalist's interpretation.
Even your link says It also specifically mentions the part I have referred to. It's a total waste of time discussing anything with you. You either fail to provide sources or you provide sources and make claims that the researchers don't, presumably trusting that people won't check them The data supports what I said above. The fact that the benefit of boosters was not considered was not mentioned by me. If you care to re-read what I stated, I was comparing those with two vaccinations with those that had immunity acquired through infection. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 13104134)
The data supports what I said above. The fact that the benefit of boosters was not considered was not mentioned by me. If you care to re-read what I stated, I was comparing those with two vaccinations with those that had immunity acquired through infection.
I'm also not sure whether you are deceitful or forgetful.
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 13103791)
Insofar as what I was saying above is concerned, the point is moot unless, of course, you are able to produce data that shows that those whose immunity was acquired through infection, lose that protection faster than those whose immunity was acquired through vaccination.
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 13103930)
There is also lots of research (mentioned in that piece) that deals with the waning effect of the vaccine and how it compares with immunity acquired through infection.
I'm now putting you back on ignore because my willpower alone isn't enough to keep me from looking at your misleading statements. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by Pollyana
(Post 13104045)
I suffered heart failure as the result of vaccine injection, aged 18 months. Was revived by an ambulance crew. Are you seriously suggesting that I should have been left to die? I did not inject it into myself, at 18 months I didn't even know what was happening. My parents had me vaccinated because they believed it was a good thing to do.
|
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by Pollyana
(Post 13104045)
I suffered heart failure as the result of vaccine injection, aged 18 months. Was revived by an ambulance crew. Are you seriously suggesting that I should have been left to die? I did not inject it into myself, at 18 months I didn't even know what was happening. My parents had me vaccinated because they believed it was a good thing to do.
Originally Posted by bats
(Post 13104172)
I had a seizure after the smallpox jab. No huge fuss was made, maybe my mum should have started a convoy to Westminster
Some real world examples We share the same healthcare system therefore you shouldn't receive care if you drink. We share the same healthcare system therefore you shouldn't receive care if you smoke. We share the same healthcare system therefore you shouldn't receive care if you don't get a vaccine. We share the same healthcare system therefore you shouldn't receive care if you take drugs. We share the same healthcare system therefore you shouldn't receive care if your fat. It irritates me because there's no need for it, sure we can all live 'purer' lifestyles but at the end of the day a persons health is predominantly determined by luck odds do change with choices though. That's why I like to come up with a little more stupid arguments that are still logically valid. We share the same healthcare system therefore you cannot receive care if you run marathons. We share the same healthcare system therefore you cannot receive care if you injure yourself playing football. We share the same healthcare system therefore you cannot receive care if you go on a trendy diet and it causes problems. We share the same healthcare system therefore you cannot receive care if you have complications from a vaccines/medications. We share the same healthcare system therefore you cannot receive care if you live longer than the average lifespan. Just to be clear these are not my real views but said in jest and also to point out that for every 'bad habit' that produces a bill for the healthcare system there are also 'good habits' that also costs the system. It's truly best to remove as many discriminations away as possible(which overall is where the world is headed). But the minute something new and scary comes along (COVID). The majority go back to the same response that has always come beforehand and failed. Such as discriminating against HIV/AIDS, gay people, drug users, any race, & trans people. I really hope that one day our reaction to events like this, as a society doesn't always resort to dividing, discrimination, and name calling. I don't think this will happen in my lifetime however. Please be aware in this pandemic I have personally witnessed the following people discriminated against: Filipinos Chinese (Asian/oriental people(do English people still use this term?)) Black people Poor people Mennonites Catholics & 'anti vaxxers' I get it, COVID is scary but again I repeat if you want to force your views on 100% of people because you want a 0% chance of exposure, don't take the chance, stay home, stop dictating, because believe me, I can't get 10 people around me to agree on anything, you want 7.6 billion people to agree, (or if you only care about the UK 68.5 million, or in Canada 38.3 million). Either way, you live an impossible dream. |
Re: Masks
That's a long post of false equivalence. Still, you're vaxxed, right? That's all that matters.
|
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by Paul_Shepherd
(Post 13103211)
...how can you wear a mask at a music concert?
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 13103233)
You can do it if you listen with your ears and not your mouth or nose.
Mid you, it was a Justin Bieber performance. :p (and there were medical (not covid) reasons) |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 13104384)
That's a long post of false equivalence. Still, you're vaxxed, right? That's all that matters.
My vaccination status isn't the point. I am fully vaccinated which is why I get to fly back to the UK on May 1st. It just gets exhausting when people are forced into something that it potentially harmful to an individual based upon fear and nothing else. The illusion of evidence based medicine | The BMJ (Again this is peer reviewed, doesn't only apply to COVID but everything). Put it this way. If the Canadian population was 100% white, and 100% vaccinated and you added anybody with COVID to the mix, the vaccine wouldn't hold up. The 6% (in new Zealand), the 19% (In Canada), the 14% (In the UK) are not necessarily the problem. The problem is that there's a pandemic and we as a society need to get through it. The best way to get through it is exposure to the population. The purpose of the vaccine is reducing the damage that COVID does but it's not a cure. If these people chose not to get vaccinated they have a higher risk of death/complications, they do not increase the risk of transmission by not getting vaccinated. If they do not want the further protection, that is fine. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by BristolUK
(Post 13104489)
My stepdaughter read an item from the paper today about a 13 year old girl attending a concert wearing noise cancelling headphones and sunglasses.
Mid you, it was a Justin Bieber performance. :p (and there were medical (not covid) reasons) |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by BristolUK
(Post 13104489)
My stepdaughter read an item from the paper today about a 13 year old girl attending a concert wearing noise cancelling headphones and sunglasses.
Mid you, it was a Justin Bieber performance. :p (and there were medical (not covid) reasons) |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by ArthurBrit
(Post 13104515)
I believe it's Arsenal that has a stadium for people that are sensitive to noise and lights. It's awesome that they have these facilities.
|
Re: Masks
So i see today on the news that when April 1st rolls around and we no longer have to submit a negative test to re enter Canada we are then subjected to 2 more rules that i wasn't aware of. Anyone entering who is fully vaccinated must still fill out the ArriveCAN app but added to this those returning MUST wear a mask in all indoor public spaces for 14 days AND they MUST keep a list of close contacts for that same 14 day duration.
They have been reminding people of this due to returns from Spring Break and schools reopening. I can imagine that school or work would know if you had been away and you would no doubt feel pressured to make sure you follow the rules but who the hell knows if you pop to the mall or Walmart or the pub? No idea how long this will be a thing. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by printer
(Post 13104675)
So i see today on the news that when April 1st rolls around and we no longer have to submit a negative test to re enter Canada we are then subjected to 2 more rules that i wasn't aware of. Anyone entering who is fully vaccinated must still fill out the ArriveCAN app but added to this those returning MUST wear a mask in all indoor public spaces for 14 days AND they MUST keep a list of close contacts for that same 14 day duration.
They have been reminding people of this due to returns from Spring Break and schools reopening. I can imagine that school or work would know if you had been away and you would no doubt feel pressured to make sure you follow the rules but who the hell knows if you pop to the mall or Walmart or the pub? No idea how long this will be a thing. After your arrivalFor 14 days following entry into Canada, you and any children who travelled with you must:
|
Re: Masks
I’m staying in downtown Ottawa for a week and I’m very surprised at the amount of people still wearing masks. I’d probably guess something like 9 out of 10 people are wearing them inside shops etc.
|
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by Gozit
(Post 13104826)
These rules have always been in place at a federal level for returning fully vaxxed travelers. They were just in lockstep with the provinces so no one noticed. But now the provincial rules are gone and the federal rules remain. According to this though it now seems to specify that you must mask in outdoor spaces as well. How this would ever be enforced is beyond me.
https://travel.gc.ca/travel-covid/tr...ntering-canada Of course absolutely none of the above is necessary should i decide to travel thousands of kilometers to the other side of Canada for a vacation. Clearly i haven't crossed an international border so documents are not needed but what risk is there from someone who has spent say 3 days in US versus someone who has spent 2 weeks in Montreal for example considering that to come back from US you have to have been double vaccinated but not if you are within Canada. |
Re: Masks
Originally Posted by Danny B
(Post 13105627)
I’m staying in downtown Ottawa for a week and I’m very surprised at the amount of people still wearing masks. I’d probably guess something like 9 out of 10 people are wearing them inside shops etc.
|
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 4:26 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.