Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2021 19:06:48 GMT -5
Show me the data from the vaccinated vs. the unvaccinated and the argument can end. 'Nurse contracts Covid-19 after being vaccinated' A nurse in California tested positive for Covid-19 more than a week after receiving Pfizer Inc's vaccine, an ABC News affiliate has reported, but a medical expert and the US drug maker said the body needs more time to build up protection.' au.yahoo.com/news/nurse-contracts-covid-19-after-being-vaccinated-204604299.htmlMaybe it works, but you need a couple of doses and just to believe in it in your heart 
I believe the producers of the vaccines said themselves that getting the shot won't prevent you from being infectious, it will just reduce the symptoms which should help with the overcrowding in the hospitals.
This thing will most likely be the new flu which we will need to get regular shots for in the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by kemp on Jan 3, 2021 7:12:26 GMT -5
'Nurse contracts Covid-19 after being vaccinated' A nurse in California tested positive for Covid-19 more than a week after receiving Pfizer Inc's vaccine, an ABC News affiliate has reported, but a medical expert and the US drug maker said the body needs more time to build up protection.' au.yahoo.com/news/nurse-contracts-covid-19-after-being-vaccinated-204604299.htmlMaybe it works, but you need a couple of doses and just to believe in it in your heart
I believe the producers of the vaccines said themselves that getting the shot won't prevent you from being infectious, it will just reduce the symptoms which should help with the overcrowding in the hospitals.
This thing will most likely be the new flu which we will need to get regular shots for in the future.
A bit of a murky area, I suppose an indemnity clause providing protection to pharmaceutical companies is smart business, just in case it doesn't prevent serious illness in some of the most vulnerable sector of the community, such as the elderly that have taken vaccination. |
|
|
|
Post by kemp on Jan 3, 2021 7:12:56 GMT -5
In any case, I thought the whole point of the infamous lockdowns in early to mid 2020 was for the purpose of buying time for governments to prepare the hospitals to handle with possible overcrowding.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2021 11:27:27 GMT -5
In any case, I thought the whole point of the infamous lockdowns in early to mid 2020 was for the purpose of buying time for governments to prepare the hospitals to handle with possible overcrowding. The hospitals can only ever handle so much volume, especially in countries with public healthcare where hospitals are operated at high occupancy to make the most of the funding. In places like the US they might have more capacity due to the private system, but even then they are overloaded. I suppose we could always build temporary hospitals around the world like they did in China, but then the problem becomes finding the people to staff them.
The lockdowns were always about making sure that if someone becomes seriously ill we can treat them. If the amount of people who are hospitalized didn't have a bed we would be seeing much higher death counts, many more people are hospitalized than die.
|
|
|
|
Post by kemp on Jan 3, 2021 17:12:33 GMT -5
In any case, I thought the whole point of the infamous lockdowns in early to mid 2020 was for the purpose of buying time for governments to prepare the hospitals to handle with possible overcrowding.
The lockdowns were always about making sure that if someone becomes seriously ill we can treat them. If the amount of people who are hospitalized didn't have a bed we would be seeing much higher death counts, many more people are hospitalized than die.
Considering that the worst effected areas in terms of the COVID-19 mortality rate ( not to mention positive case numbers ) have occurred in places with the most draconian lockdowns I would say that the lockdowns have not clearly worked, not that a knee jerk reaction by bureaucrats to suppress and focus on restricting the healthy over that of prioritizing care for the most vulnerable would ever be successful. In the meantime non COVID-19 deaths such as cancer deaths, child death from measles and women dying in labour has steadily risen. 'Like UNICEF5 and others, we believe that lockdowns kill people through disruption of health services and deprivation of livelihoods.' 'Lockdown is not egalitarian: the costs fall on the global poor' www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31422-7/fulltextThis has been the disaster in the making, not only from a civil liberties and economic viewpoint, but also the general health of respective populations that have had to endure these government enforced restrictions. |
|
|
|
Post by Jason Aiken on Jan 8, 2021 15:05:03 GMT -5
I did not see a whole lot of balanced analysis in that last salvo, so I removed all the posts. Remember in this thread I wanted to keep discussions neutral and analytic, with no personal attacks or partisan politics. I can't believe how quickly that escalated. True it was a legitimate event to discuss, but not in that manner amongst fellow board members.
Sorry, but I just have had enough of this thread and politics in general (and especially on this forum). So this topic is going to stay closed.
I just don't feel like dealing with this anymore, there's plenty of other outlets for this kind of thing and I doubt most members will disagree with me.
|
|
