The P&R Plague Thread (Covid-19)

[Scarlet]

5 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

 

Did you read about the Harvard Business School? 

In a setting where 100% are vaccinated, and 2 people out of a hundred had  breakthrough cases, what percentage of the vaccinated would account for those cases?  Would it be 100%?   

 

Does that mean vaccines don't work?  In the cases of the Harvard business school do you know if the 5% of the unvaxxed were the initial source?  

 

How many breakthrough cases are we talking about vs total population of the school?  What would be the case numbers if no one was vaccinated?

[DevoHusker]

2 minutes ago, Scarlet said:

What would be the case numbers if no one was vaccinated?

 

This is the pertinent question that cannot be answered. 

[jaws]

1 hour ago, DevoHusker said:

95% of students and 96% of staff fully vaxed

 

 

 

 

This is all of Harvard, but it looks like they jumped the gun. 

 

https://www.harvard.edu/coronavirus/testing-tracing/harvard-university-wide-covid-19-testing-dashboard/

 

Last 7 days positivity rate

Harvard: 0.16% (40k tests)

Mass: 2.09%

Boston (14 day): 1.19%

Cambridge (14 day): 0.37%

 

On our campus we are extremely happy with a 0.6% positivity rate. 

[FrantzHardySwag]

I want to reiterate my position, because I know it was @Archy1221 original point. I think if you can prove anti-bodies from a COVID infection, you should be exempt from the vaccine. I had COVID and got the vax anyways, because my doc told me to, but it should be an option to skip it IF you have antibodies. It would need to be a proven test, because people would abuse it. For example my uncle claims he got COVID, in small town Nebraska, in December of 2019. 

[Archy1221]

26 minutes ago, Scarlet said:

Got it. 

 

There is however every bit as much data on the safety of the vaccines as there is on immunity due to prior infection.  There's also a lot of indications that a person who had covid before and later is vaccinated will possibly have immunity for years.  Possibly life long.  

 

Then there's the issue of administering the claims of those who state they have had Covid before.  Is there a standard?  Does an antibody test suffice?  I'm sure there'd be every bit the amount of pushback if this was required proof of immunity.  The goalposts will just move.

 

I just think so many people are out-thinking this.  Get the vaxx.  It's that simple.

 

 

 

 

I agree and I’m pro vax, have had both and agree is very safe and seems very effective. I will never dispute those points unless something extremely unlikely comes out.  
 

I just don’t think it’s fair to shame and smear someone who is young and previously infected like was done on here.  

[NoLongerN]

56 minutes ago, suh_fan93 said:

Just terrible.  

 

 

How sad.  He is breathing like he just finished a marathon.  At that age and with type of breathing, it was very risky to leave.  That doctor/physician type person did an admirable job explaining the risk to him and was so kind.

[DevoHusker]

39 minutes ago, FrantzHardySwag said:

I want to reiterate my position, because I know it was @Archy1221 original point. I think if you can prove anti-bodies from a COVID infection, you should be exempt from the vaccine. I had COVID and got the vax anyways, because my doc told me to, but it should be an option to skip it IF you have antibodies. It would need to be a proven test, because people would abuse it. For example my uncle claims he got COVID, in small town Nebraska, in December of 2019. 

 

I like that proposal, and believe a lot of currently anti/hesitant folks would too.

 

Regarding your uncle, he probably did. Seem somebody had links on here that the virus was likely present long before Feb 2020. 

[RedDenver]

14 hours ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

Smallpox had a 30% mortality rate.... Covid currently has a 1.6% mortality rate, and it's actually much lower than that when you consider that there have been millions who haven't known they've had it, so weren't tested, and those that didn't get very sick, so weren't tested.... They are not the same illnesses.

 

I'm not anti-vaccine, not at all, but I don't like making businesses in the private sector turn away business because of a virus like COVID-19. This thing has been politicized from the beginning, by both sides, and it's just gross.

So your post that they have new powers was BS. And you were contributing to the politicization. Nice try to move the goal posts though.

 

[B.B. Hemingway]

2 hours ago, RedDenver said:

So your post that they have new powers was BS. And you were contributing to the politicization. Nice try to move the goal posts though.

 

 

Lol, what? It's a power grab. It's hard to argue otherwise at this point, with their large parties in cities where you aren't allowed to go eat in a restaurant with your family, and their photo ops where they put their masks on, only to immediately remove them after the picture/news conference ends.. My point with the smallpox was that it makes sense to go to the extremes of a mandate when you have something wiping out a 1/3 of the people who get it, which isn't anywhere near the case with Covid. 

 

Comparing Covid and smallpox isn't moving the goal posts, it's pointing out that they're two separate games entirely.

[RedDenver]

25 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

Lol, what? It's a power grab.

What power did they grab since vaccine mandates have been around for over 200 years in the US? (And many states and territories before the formation of the country.)

 

25 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

It's hard to argue otherwise at this point, with their large parties in cities where you aren't allowed to go eat in a restaurant with your family, and their photo ops where they put their masks on, only to immediately remove them after the picture/news conference ends.. My point with the smallpox was that it makes sense to go to the extremes of a mandate when you have something wiping out a 1/3 of the people who get it, which isn't anywhere near the case with Covid. 

 

Comparing Covid and smallpox isn't moving the goal posts, it's pointing out that they're two separate games entirely.

You're arguing the severity of the need for a mandate, not whether the government is newly getting that power - they already have it.

 

If you want to make the argument the government shouldn't be using the power they have, that's a different argument (although 700,000 dead really hurts that argument). But to say they've got new power or that they're grabbing power is nonsensical since it's a power they've always had.

[knapplc]

38 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

Comparing Covid and smallpox isn't moving the goal posts, it's pointing out that they're two separate games entirely.

 

How many people need to die before people are OK mandating vaccines and face masks?  700,000 isn't enough?

[B.B. Hemingway]

1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

What power did they grab since vaccine mandates have been around for over 200 years in the US? (And many states and territories before the formation of the country.)

 

You're arguing the severity of the need for a mandate, not whether the government is newly getting that power - they already have it.

 

If you want to make the argument the government shouldn't be using the power they have, that's a different argument (although 700,000 dead really hurts that argument). But to say they've got new power or that they're grabbing power is nonsensical since it's a power they've always had.

 

Fair enough. I am definitely arguing towards the current, and clear, abuse of power, rather than it being something new.... I could of worded my initial, jestful complaint better.

 

1 hour ago, knapplc said:

 

How many people need to die before people are OK mandating vaccines and face masks?  700,000 isn't enough?

 

That 700,000 number isn't near as daunting when you make clear that it's 1.6% of people we know have had it, and possibly/likely under 1% if the amount of untested cases could be known.

 

Again, I'm not anti-vaccine. I think it's a good, and necessary thing. Although, I would like to see more progress in therapeutics for the virus, but that's another topic.... My issue with a mandate is the government telling people what to do with, and how to handle the clientele coming into, their businesses. It's a clear government overreach, and a power grab.  Moreso when you consider the mortality rate of the virus. Maybe, under much more extreme conditions, the mandate would be necessary. 

 

 

[knapplc]

32 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

That 700,000 number isn't near as daunting when you make clear that it's 1.6% of people we know have had it, and possibly/likely under 1% if the amount of untested cases could be known.

 

This is just cold-hearted and bloodthirsty.

 

Seven Hundred Thousand People are dead.

 

Who cares what the percentages are?

 

That's bonkers.

 

 

And the fear of a government takeover is a little hard to swallow when there was attempted insurrection THIS YEAR with not remotely this level of complaint.

 

It's politics, and it stinks that people are politicizing how they react to these things because of which side they're on.

[commando]

FWIW.....the 700,000 number is still growing.

 

and i guess people want blood tests now to go somewhere instead of vaccine cards so they have to  prove they have antibodies.   that seems a bit more intrusive to me....but get that passed and i will be ok with that also i guess.

[Scarlet]

1 hour ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

Fair enough. I am definitely arguing towards the current, and clear, abuse of power, rather than it being something new.... I could of worded my initial, jestful complaint better.

 

 

That 700,000 number isn't near as daunting when you make clear that it's 1.6% of people we know have had it, and possibly/likely under 1% if the amount of untested cases could be known.

 

Again, I'm not anti-vaccine. I think it's a good, and necessary thing. Although, I would like to see more progress in therapeutics for the virus, but that's another topic.... My issue with a mandate is the government telling people what to do with, and how to handle the clientele coming into, their businesses. It's a clear government overreach, and a power grab.  Moreso when you consider the mortality rate of the virus. Maybe, under much more extreme conditions, the mandate would be necessary. 

 

 

This could be the most tone deaf take I've seen in ages.  700,000 dead and counting.  Can you not wrap your head around that death toll?  That's a brutal number and you're saying "meh"?

 

That number also does not include the permanently maimed with a horrible quality of life nor does it include the continued economic impact, world wide of allowing this virus to multiple and mutate.

 

Thank God we have the vaccines.  What would be the death toll had the Delta variant arrived in full force before our vaccines were available, especially for our most at risk?  But yeah, old people.