When administered to the at risk population. When required for young, hospitalization system impact would be marginal.
https://covid19-sciencetable.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/2...
Please cite your sources.
https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/epidemiological-s...
Which groups are not "at-risk" here? What age? Because it seems like there is a significant % of the population in groups other than 80+ that are in the hospital.
So maybe find the source and share it here since you are the one who made the argument? Burden of proof is on you, not me.
In my case I was looking for covid case data in children broken down by age. The only data I found was over 18 and under 18. It wasn't until recently when 0-4, 5-12 and 12-18 age group data was shared. So while I understand your point, it's doing a disservice to the actual problem at hand and thats enabling others to make advised choices.
If you’re looking for a response to your numbers that you pulled out, we still have many worse diseases and our leaders economic policies during covid impacted and hurt more people than the “5 million dead”
I also didn’t see you or anyone complaining about the obesity; diabetes, car crashes; depression and other far worse epidemics that we’ve had induced by our same shitty health agencies that sell us the covid cure today.
I can’t spread obesity diabetes and depression to others. Cars are regulated immensely (though I do think it’s better to design cities that don’t need them… and hey people that walk more are less obese, which reduces diabetes risk).
For someone quick to point out a supposed fallacy, you’re heavily leaning on whataboutism. Not that you care, but I am also active in my city for improving pedestrian infrastructure at the expensive of space for cars, and I live in one of the most walkable cities in the country.
and also does there exist a sufficient amount of medical professionals to agree to service an all-anti-vaxxer school without complaint?
They all live in very remote areas with few people so the risk is low to begin with. They aren't entirely "unintelligent", and I respect their decisions.
1. infectious disease that can kill others. it's great that they are remote, but they still interact with others sometimes. no one requires them to wear warning signs. as numerous others have pointed out, it's like drunk driving. drinking while driving is not just personal choice, even if it seems like just you minding your own alcohol.
1a. even if the disease itself is not sufficient to kill people but causes them to seek medical attention, beyond the capacity of the healthcare system, this means worse outcomes for those who could not have avoided ending up in the hospital.
2. ask what doctors think about treating them when they get polio or things we havent seen in many generations.
even intelligent people are terrible at assessing risk in areas where they are not professionals. see how many doctors are antivaxxers, how many security professionals click on https://chase.myaccount.com links, etc.
But if it comes down to it, I’m actually completely ok with such an approach.
How is this any different than mandating the small pox vaccine, or the polio vaccine?
The vaccine dramatically lowers the probability of a severe infection; reduces the burden on healthcare systems - which in, in many countries apart from the US (for instance, Canada) is a public good. And therefore enables hospitals to provide care for patients with other diseases; patients who need urgent surgical procedures.
Even where there is private healthcare, it still is a public resource.
One possible symmetric response to people who refuse to get vaccinated is to deny them access to healthcare if they get a covid infection and need medical care - But I think that is far more draconian and inhumane, and is arguably more akin to medical apartheid, than denying those who chose to remain unvaccinated (without broadly accepted medical reasons) access to public goods when they do not accept their responsibility towards public welfare.
The company has had petty CEOs that did shady things with users posts and data.
(https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacharysmith/2021/12/23/us-paus...)
Odd thought: Even if ineffective against omicron, why would the government pause distribution of any, safe medicine? Doctor's should still be allowed to use it as they see fit, no?
I desperately urge others who are also capable to take such a hit to follow suit.
Edit: Note, I'm also vaccinated. J&J March 2020.
The devil is in the details. The EUA designation was pushed through because there was no other, "obvious" treatment (despite proven efficacy of a combination of prophylactic treatments).
They are testing this thing on us. Even if it works I do not consent to be tested on.
"The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that, before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject, there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person, which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment."
First, you would have to find a jurisdiction that officially accepted the Nuremberg code and move there, second you would have to prove that the Covid vaccination program was a medical experiment and third you would have to explain why you accepted prior vaccinations that were part of a public health program (such as polio vaccinations)
I reject your call to take a stand because I don't think there's anything to stand on or any right that I'm losing.
Trotting out the nuremberg code for a vaccine intended to help reduce world suffering (that is being used in a moral ways) is in poor taste, in my opinion. It was written because Nazis were using Jewish and other people in scientific experiments that make vaccine trials look pleasant.
Also, all the necessary information for you to make a decision according to the code has already been provided to you, and the US government (not sure about others) has a constitutionally supported right to mandate that you take a vaccine.
You got a jab hundreds of millions of people got. I got a jab a few thousand of people got.
I got to install an app and log all sorts of things on it every couple days. You didn’t have to do that.
You received a QR code to allow you to participate in a variety of things. I didn’t, and had to even-more-experimentally mix and match my untested vaccine with an EMA approved one so I could get a Covid safe ticket.
I’m fine by the way.
All I got was, “sit here for 15 minutes”.
I don't remember that for any other vaccine I’ve ever taken.
The 15 min wait is because some known side effects manifest within those 15 minutes. Everything else is either minor, or extremely rare, or both. The US has the VAERS system if you want more on side effect reporting, but your doctor is supposed to do the work.
Either way, the vaccine was tested. That it didn't go through a 10 year trial period is because we didn't have the time. Will you suddenly explode or combust in 11 years? I can't prove you won't. I would happily put money on the negative though, care to wager?
And you're being deliberately obtuse. Like most medicines, vaccine injections have other ingredients like preservatives, the carrier fluid, etc. People can be allergic to the other ingredients but not the mRNA/TDAP/Influenza/whatever vaccine.
Quite the hyperbole: not all government services, just employment insurance and that too if you were only fired for not receiving the vaccine. A reminder that in many of these jobs, there was already a requirement for getting a set of vaccines so this is not new. Though for some people, this vaccine is "different" but once you ask them to explain why they can't. So no new rules. You needed vaccines for most of the jobs and this just an additional one.
You will still receive employment insurance for other stuff, irrespective of your vaccination status.
> prevented from patronizing various businesses
You are not prevented from accessing essential businesses and no one checks your vaccination status or even asks for one.
> even restricted from traveling and the ability to work
You are still free to drive to work or take local public transit.
The difference between ICU rates of unvaccinated and vaccinated people in Ontario for example tells us that the vaccination is working:
https://covid19-sciencetable.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/2...
^ Please see the above graph.
If you cannot participate in society moving forward, then you should not expect society to cater to your needs.
Then the whole point of this thing is pointless. We're selectively punishing people. We don't prevent or punish positive cases from going around to work, public transport, etc and infecting others, yet we punish people that choose to simply not vaccinate.
> "If you cannot participate in society moving forward, then you should not expect society to cater to your needs."
Just like to point out that you can use the same line of reasoning for a host of other things, even unrelated to medical themes. Like say allowing facial recognition cameras in all homes to prevent domestic violence and child abuse. Yet most people supposedly stand on principle against it, despite the "pragmatism" of it. Likewise we should be standing here on plain old and impractical "body autonomy" and protecting people's personal medical choices.
It just depends on how far you want to take the hyperbole and how far you want to extrapolate the doomsday predictions that flow from this. E.g. How about state-mandated abortions for down-syndrome? Or preventing pro-creation of known carriers of genetic disorders? Look at how we tip-toed around aids after we eventually acknowledged it.
As a side note, we should all be worried about how this entire world-incident is allowing laws and understandings that we've had and worked on attaining for decades if not centuries to be simply and casually bypassed under some banner of "safety", "science" and pragmatism. There has to be a better way to deal with this and as you say, move society forward instead of backward.
It's not pointless. Unvaccinated people are far far more likely to occupy the hospital and the ICU -- see above. How is that pointless? I am not talking about positivity as that is not relevant. See the official numbers above.
Your hyperbole is not valid as these jobs already required vaccinations so I am not sure what the new outrage is.
Simply not true. Defying a public health order is illegal.